What do you think?
Rate this book
The Abolition of Work and Other Essays
Bob Black's first book, originally published by Loompanics
168 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1985
37 people are currently reading
2450 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 143 reviews
July 27, 2019
«El trabajo es perjudicial para la salud. Es más, el trabajo es asesinato en masa o genocidio. Directa o indirectamente, el trabajo matará a la mayoría de las personas que lean estas palabras.»
Reseña en español | Review in English (below)
La Abolición del Trabajo es un ensayo anarquista irreverente, honesto y divertidísimo, que se hace partidario del derecho a la pereza. Aunque se queda un poco desactualizado en algunos aspectos (escrito en la primera mitad de los años 80), muchas ideas se pueden seguir extrapolando al momento actual, y en este hecho es donde produce entre gracia y miedo. A modo de epílogo, esta edición consta además del ensayo Lo que no hay que confundir en cuanto a esclavitud asalariada y rechazo del trabajo del francés Julius Van Daal. Son dos ensayos muy cortitos, así que no os quiero contar mucho más para no destriparos lo que podáis leer aquí dentro.
Recomendado si os interesa leer y saber más sobre filosofía anarquista y anticapitalista.
———
The Abolition of Work is an irreverent, honest and hilarious anarchist essay that advocates the right to laziness. Although it’s a bit outdated in some aspects (written in the first half of the 80s), many ideas can be extrapolated to the current time, and in this fact is where it stands between hilarity and fear. As an epilogue, this Spanish edition also includes the essay What should not be confused in terms of wage slavery and rejection of work by French writer Julius Van Daal. They are two very short essays (lees than 40 pages each), so I don’t want to tell you much more about them.
Recommended if you are interested in reading and knowing more about anarchist and anti-capitalist philosophy.
«Si queremos deshacernos del patriarcado, tenemos que deshacernos de la familia nuclear cuyo “trabajo en la sombra” no pagado, como dice Ivan Illich, hace posible el sistema de trabajo que a su vez la torna imprescindible»
September 4, 2008
Bob Black is a man, surrounded by controversy, much of his own making. He often skewers the sacred cows of the "anarchist" millieu. Many people despise him for his numerous outrages and outrageous behavior. Despite his lack of judgement, he often is an entertaining writer and critical thinker.
This book is a collection of his writing from the early to mid-1980's. The "Abolition of Work" and the preface to the "Right to be Lazy" deal with how work degrades our lives. Both of these essays are pretty honest assements and are worthwhile for their insights.
There's an article about his beef with Processed World magazine, a review of Conan the Barbarian, positive-thinking conferences, the Church of the Sub-genius, Libritarian fallacies and others.
His word play can get a bit tedious and his abrasiveness can be off-puting at times but this book was pretty readable. My main complaint is that the book feels dated since most of the material was specific to a time/place. I do feel that Black needs to be considered as a thinker even if people dont endorse his actions.
This book is a collection of his writing from the early to mid-1980's. The "Abolition of Work" and the preface to the "Right to be Lazy" deal with how work degrades our lives. Both of these essays are pretty honest assements and are worthwhile for their insights.
There's an article about his beef with Processed World magazine, a review of Conan the Barbarian, positive-thinking conferences, the Church of the Sub-genius, Libritarian fallacies and others.
His word play can get a bit tedious and his abrasiveness can be off-puting at times but this book was pretty readable. My main complaint is that the book feels dated since most of the material was specific to a time/place. I do feel that Black needs to be considered as a thinker even if people dont endorse his actions.
December 12, 2018
This is one of the works that I was reading back when I was exploring anarchy more generally, instead of anarchocapitalism in particular (which, arguably, is a break from anarchist tradition, but frankly, I don't really care at this point). Let no one say I didn't give left-wing political philosophy a fair chance. I really, really did. God and the State, Towards a New Socialism, and Mother also come to my mind. Of these, only the last one was genuinely good.
The Abolition of Work is more on the anarchist side of socialism, but no less socialistic for it. Bob Blacks idea is that we should all just chill and make work fun again, the way it (supposedly) was in the far past. I don't fully disagree with him as far as the problem is concerned, and in fact have little sympathy for the work-save-die mindset fostered by certain religious reformers, unlike many of my capitalist brethren. I don't think capitalism in general, or labor management in particular, are to blame for the state of affairs, however. Things like the income tax or inflation force us to work long and grueling hours. With inflation, I don't think I have to explain much (when saving your money is discouraged, you can hardly make provision for taking long periods off from work), but that the income tax also discourages leisure does sound absurd, on the face of it. It isn't necessarily so, however. It can discourage working, the same way taxing smoking discourages smoking, but it also reduces overall living standards, and working is how we sustain our living standards. If you really badly want to live in a house with two bedrooms, then you might be willing to work the extra hours to pay for it under a scheme of income taxation. It all depends on how you value your leisure time against your living standards, as Bertrand de Jouvenel described in The Ethics of Redistribution. Add progressive income taxation to the mix, and you can essentially lock people into their current workload. If you work for seventy hours one week, and fourty the next, you may easily end up unable to pay the taxes from your more laborious week, forcing you to work another seventy hour week, especially when there is high interest on your tax debt. I have seen this in effect, and it's diabolic. There is no other word for this.
Bob Blacks solution, from what I remember, is to turn labor into a game of sorts. How he envisions that, I do not know. I don't think you can make picking up trash a fun leisure activity by adding highscores to it. If you could, you could also bet some manager would've thought of doing that to motivate his workers, under the cries of "bread and circuces" from a dozen Marxists, who only want workers to have fun when it also pisses off the capitalists. The main problem is not that we cannot all work less and have fun (income taxation aside), but that we cannot do so and maintain our living standards. There is a reason workers get paid: Because otherwise, they wouldn't work nearly as smart, hard, or long. If you don't pay them but only rely on their instinct to have fun in your steel factory, then chances are they won't even work enough to make up for the depletion of your capital. If that happens in several industries, the economy is as good as doomed. As I indicated above, I am not one to insist that we should uphold our material living standards by all means necessary, but we also shouldn't stupidly sacrifice them to the point where we may not have enough wealth to afford food, clothing, housing, and basic medical care. This is exactly what would happen if we tried to turn the economy into a game, though. Bob Black insists that wouldn't be the case, as most jobs "aren't needed". Then why do they exist? Evidently, someone must have thought they're worthwhile, and that was either a legislator or a government - in which case Bob Black should've just sided with the Chicagoans and Austrians - or a capitalist who inexplicably decided to outright waste money, instead of funneling it back into his business to increase its profitability, or directly into his own pocket. Besides, Bob Black tells us, we don't need "war production, nuclear power, junk food, feminine hygiene deodorant" and... cars. Yes, cars. Disregarding the fact that much more is at stake than junk food (and that nuclear power is creating and not destroying wealth), Bob Blacks attitude of "stop liking what I don't like" rubs me the wrong way. Why is my girlfriend not allowed to wear deodorant, but he is allowed to read hellenic philosophers recreationally? Because his tastes are more refined? There is always someone whose tastes are more refined than yours, someone who reads Plato and all the commentaries ever published on him, someone who not just refuses to eat junk food, but who also eats everything in moderation and only if it is particularly nutritious. It is perfectly fine to have standards, to see some pastimes as lesser than others, and it is even possible to draw a line and declare that some pastimes are worthless or positively harmful (from which it doesn't follow that they should be prohibited, I should add). However, it appears to me that Bob Black drew this line at himself, as those who attack materialism are wont to do.
Bob Black is a typical utopian, but at least he is a legitimate utopian. His vision isn't a bad one, at least, we'd all rather live in a world where all activities are fulfilling and where we can live on our own terms. He has that on certain other leftists, whose visions of gangs of kids running around correcting everyones grammar scare me more than any horror movie. That is why I award this two stars, instead of one. His solutions are unworkable, at least if we want to also have anything close resembling our current living standards, and his agitation, far from making the workers of the world more relaxed, will only make impressionable college students even more pissed at the Amazon storehouses they don't work in. This is a criticism I have of leftist thought generally: It doesn't deliver on its promises, be that radical scientific advancement, fulfillment through hedonism or collectivism, or enlightenment through the deconstruction of religious ideas. It is destructive, not constructive, but as it turns out, if you keep destructing everything, from hierarchies to romantic love to religion, you end up with a void. Granted, relaxing our work ethic would not always be the greatest loss, but we cannot go half as far as Bob Black expects us to go.
The Abolition of Work is more on the anarchist side of socialism, but no less socialistic for it. Bob Blacks idea is that we should all just chill and make work fun again, the way it (supposedly) was in the far past. I don't fully disagree with him as far as the problem is concerned, and in fact have little sympathy for the work-save-die mindset fostered by certain religious reformers, unlike many of my capitalist brethren. I don't think capitalism in general, or labor management in particular, are to blame for the state of affairs, however. Things like the income tax or inflation force us to work long and grueling hours. With inflation, I don't think I have to explain much (when saving your money is discouraged, you can hardly make provision for taking long periods off from work), but that the income tax also discourages leisure does sound absurd, on the face of it. It isn't necessarily so, however. It can discourage working, the same way taxing smoking discourages smoking, but it also reduces overall living standards, and working is how we sustain our living standards. If you really badly want to live in a house with two bedrooms, then you might be willing to work the extra hours to pay for it under a scheme of income taxation. It all depends on how you value your leisure time against your living standards, as Bertrand de Jouvenel described in The Ethics of Redistribution. Add progressive income taxation to the mix, and you can essentially lock people into their current workload. If you work for seventy hours one week, and fourty the next, you may easily end up unable to pay the taxes from your more laborious week, forcing you to work another seventy hour week, especially when there is high interest on your tax debt. I have seen this in effect, and it's diabolic. There is no other word for this.
Bob Blacks solution, from what I remember, is to turn labor into a game of sorts. How he envisions that, I do not know. I don't think you can make picking up trash a fun leisure activity by adding highscores to it. If you could, you could also bet some manager would've thought of doing that to motivate his workers, under the cries of "bread and circuces" from a dozen Marxists, who only want workers to have fun when it also pisses off the capitalists. The main problem is not that we cannot all work less and have fun (income taxation aside), but that we cannot do so and maintain our living standards. There is a reason workers get paid: Because otherwise, they wouldn't work nearly as smart, hard, or long. If you don't pay them but only rely on their instinct to have fun in your steel factory, then chances are they won't even work enough to make up for the depletion of your capital. If that happens in several industries, the economy is as good as doomed. As I indicated above, I am not one to insist that we should uphold our material living standards by all means necessary, but we also shouldn't stupidly sacrifice them to the point where we may not have enough wealth to afford food, clothing, housing, and basic medical care. This is exactly what would happen if we tried to turn the economy into a game, though. Bob Black insists that wouldn't be the case, as most jobs "aren't needed". Then why do they exist? Evidently, someone must have thought they're worthwhile, and that was either a legislator or a government - in which case Bob Black should've just sided with the Chicagoans and Austrians - or a capitalist who inexplicably decided to outright waste money, instead of funneling it back into his business to increase its profitability, or directly into his own pocket. Besides, Bob Black tells us, we don't need "war production, nuclear power, junk food, feminine hygiene deodorant" and... cars. Yes, cars. Disregarding the fact that much more is at stake than junk food (and that nuclear power is creating and not destroying wealth), Bob Blacks attitude of "stop liking what I don't like" rubs me the wrong way. Why is my girlfriend not allowed to wear deodorant, but he is allowed to read hellenic philosophers recreationally? Because his tastes are more refined? There is always someone whose tastes are more refined than yours, someone who reads Plato and all the commentaries ever published on him, someone who not just refuses to eat junk food, but who also eats everything in moderation and only if it is particularly nutritious. It is perfectly fine to have standards, to see some pastimes as lesser than others, and it is even possible to draw a line and declare that some pastimes are worthless or positively harmful (from which it doesn't follow that they should be prohibited, I should add). However, it appears to me that Bob Black drew this line at himself, as those who attack materialism are wont to do.
Bob Black is a typical utopian, but at least he is a legitimate utopian. His vision isn't a bad one, at least, we'd all rather live in a world where all activities are fulfilling and where we can live on our own terms. He has that on certain other leftists, whose visions of gangs of kids running around correcting everyones grammar scare me more than any horror movie. That is why I award this two stars, instead of one. His solutions are unworkable, at least if we want to also have anything close resembling our current living standards, and his agitation, far from making the workers of the world more relaxed, will only make impressionable college students even more pissed at the Amazon storehouses they don't work in. This is a criticism I have of leftist thought generally: It doesn't deliver on its promises, be that radical scientific advancement, fulfillment through hedonism or collectivism, or enlightenment through the deconstruction of religious ideas. It is destructive, not constructive, but as it turns out, if you keep destructing everything, from hierarchies to romantic love to religion, you end up with a void. Granted, relaxing our work ethic would not always be the greatest loss, but we cannot go half as far as Bob Black expects us to go.
March 24, 2018
After finishing Bob's essay and having done the surrounding reading, I have come to the conclusion that he is a hack and his arguments are rubbish.
The main problem is how to critique something that is just a litany of errors, misrepresentations, and idealistic nonsense? I'd need 3-4x the word count of the polemic to cover it all. There are strawmen all throughout (e.g. feminists want women in charge, no, they want women to be in charge as much as men). There are just straight up errors (e.g. agriculture isn't losing workers to secure power, but because of mechanisation).
There is also an inherent laziness to his arguments. He'll pepper the essay with references to various people but not actually cite what it is about their work he is referring to (e.g. Foucault is name-dropped without citing what the hell it is meant to be that he has supposedly complexified). And then in contrast to this, he is directly drawing upon the work of people like Keynes and Bertrand Russell but fails to mention them at all.
On that point, Russell's In Praise of Idleness is clearly influential to this essay. But where Russell is very precise in his language and arguments, Bob is regurgitating these arguments in a more extreme and less compelling format. I mean, he doesn't really adequately differentiate between work and drudgery, lumping the two together so he can move onto saying we should be ludic and play. And this play is again poorly differentiated between play and enjoyable or rewarding work. Russell would have a field day with this.
Now, I don't disagree with Bob, or Russell, or the many others who have argued about changing our focus in society away from work. But this polemic essay just comes off as provocative extremism that fails to grasp many pretty simple ideas, preferring to misrepresent and appear intellectual without doing the hard work required to make the argument cogent.
What does Bob Black mean by work? https://libcom.org/library/what-do-we...
Bertrand Russell's In Praise of Idleness https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...
John Maynard Keynes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ma...
The main problem is how to critique something that is just a litany of errors, misrepresentations, and idealistic nonsense? I'd need 3-4x the word count of the polemic to cover it all. There are strawmen all throughout (e.g. feminists want women in charge, no, they want women to be in charge as much as men). There are just straight up errors (e.g. agriculture isn't losing workers to secure power, but because of mechanisation).
There is also an inherent laziness to his arguments. He'll pepper the essay with references to various people but not actually cite what it is about their work he is referring to (e.g. Foucault is name-dropped without citing what the hell it is meant to be that he has supposedly complexified). And then in contrast to this, he is directly drawing upon the work of people like Keynes and Bertrand Russell but fails to mention them at all.
On that point, Russell's In Praise of Idleness is clearly influential to this essay. But where Russell is very precise in his language and arguments, Bob is regurgitating these arguments in a more extreme and less compelling format. I mean, he doesn't really adequately differentiate between work and drudgery, lumping the two together so he can move onto saying we should be ludic and play. And this play is again poorly differentiated between play and enjoyable or rewarding work. Russell would have a field day with this.
Now, I don't disagree with Bob, or Russell, or the many others who have argued about changing our focus in society away from work. But this polemic essay just comes off as provocative extremism that fails to grasp many pretty simple ideas, preferring to misrepresent and appear intellectual without doing the hard work required to make the argument cogent.
What does Bob Black mean by work? https://libcom.org/library/what-do-we...
Bertrand Russell's In Praise of Idleness https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...
John Maynard Keynes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ma...
September 7, 2025
Leí otra edición, en realidad. Incluía el ensayo sobre la abolición del trabajo, tres ensayos más y una entrevista.
A mis 58 años puedo decir que cada cierto tiempo leo ensayos anarquistas y suele pasarme lo mismo: termino procesando con entusiasmo sus ideas, vislumbro destellos de verdad, coincido y discrepo casi en igual proporción y quedo convencido de que hay ideas iluminadoras, pero mayormente impracticables, por lo menos a gran escala.
Sobre el ensayo del trabajo, comparto bastante la perspectiva central sobre lo nocivo, destructor, coercitivo, limitante, peligroso y enajenante del trabajo, una actividad que suele idealizarse por ideologías diversas e incluso contrarias.
Los ensayos anarquistas suelen ser detonantes del pensamiento crítico, la reflexión y la imaginación. No son una manual de autoayuda ni un catecismo ni menos un bloque ideológico monolítico incuestionable y quizás esa sea la razón de que siga interesado en leer este tipo de publicaciones.
Salud y anarquía.
A mis 58 años puedo decir que cada cierto tiempo leo ensayos anarquistas y suele pasarme lo mismo: termino procesando con entusiasmo sus ideas, vislumbro destellos de verdad, coincido y discrepo casi en igual proporción y quedo convencido de que hay ideas iluminadoras, pero mayormente impracticables, por lo menos a gran escala.
Sobre el ensayo del trabajo, comparto bastante la perspectiva central sobre lo nocivo, destructor, coercitivo, limitante, peligroso y enajenante del trabajo, una actividad que suele idealizarse por ideologías diversas e incluso contrarias.
Los ensayos anarquistas suelen ser detonantes del pensamiento crítico, la reflexión y la imaginación. No son una manual de autoayuda ni un catecismo ni menos un bloque ideológico monolítico incuestionable y quizás esa sea la razón de que siga interesado en leer este tipo de publicaciones.
Salud y anarquía.
November 4, 2020
Un très court texte, mais qui brasse beaucoup d'idées.
Bob Black est un anarchiste américain (rien que ça déjà, c'est fort), et il a écrit ce texte en 1985.
Dans ce pamphlet, il remet en cause la notion de travail, du moins le travail salarié tel que nous le connaissons dans le monde capitaliste. En effet, en bon anarchiste, il critique le travail lorsqu'il devient aliénant, c'est-à-dire dés que son exercice devient dicté par des impératifs bassement matérialistes (bouffe, loyer, etc...), et soumis au salariat.
Le travail y est donc présenté pour ce qu'il est : une activité contrainte, aliénante jusque dans les temps de loisirs qu'elle concède au travailleur puisque même une fois le travail terminé, nos vies s'organisent autour de la journée de travail à venir.
Bob Black milite pour une révolution ludique, où le travail ne serait plus un asservissement de l'individu, mais au contraire stimulerait la créativité (au sens large) des gens. Pour cela, il s'agirait, au contraire de ce qui se fait aujourd'hui, de limiter le temps de travail, et de ne le consacrer qu'aux tâches vraiment vitales.
En cela, on peut le rapprocher des théories de Paul Lafargue, le gendre de Karl Marx, qui militait pour le droit à la paresse, et une semaine de quatre heures de travail, durée suffisante pour que l'Humanité produise suffisamment pour se nourrir, loger et vêtir. Le reste du temps ainsi économisé serait consacré à l'épanouissement personnel via un travail non salarié, librement consenti et choisi.
L'idée de jeu n'y est pas vu ici sous sa forme de "loisir ludique" (type jeux de plateau, sport ou jeux de rôles par exemple), mais comme toute activité que l'on peut pratiquer pour le plaisir, en dehors de toute contrainte salariée. Bob Black cite par exemple le cas du jardinage, mais plus largement, il s'agirait de laisser tout un chacun choisir librement les activités auxquelles il souhaiterait s'adonner, même à petite doses, pour que leurs pratiques deviennent d'avantage un jeu qu'un travail.
Bob Black estime ainsi que si chacun pouvait dégager du temps pour lui, pour faire ce qui l'intéresse vraiment, émergerait une société du dilettantisme qui libérerait la créativité et la connaissance humaine.
La meilleure comparaison que Black puisse proposer tiens au sexe. Pour lui, l'archétype du jeu productif est la rencontre sexuelle, rencontre dans laquelle tout le monde donne et tout le monde reçoit, mais surtout activité pour laquelle plus on donne, plus on reçoit. En appliquant ce même principe au travail, dit-il, les meilleurs aspects de l'activité sexuelle s'appliqueront à tous les aspects de la vie quotidienne.
Ce texte, pour utopique qu'il soit, n'en est pas moins très bien argumenté, et pas du tout farfelu. Il pointe au contraire toutes les aberrations du système actuel qui tend à rendre le travail vain, pour ne pas dire chiant. Le constat qu'il dresse sur le monde du travail salarié, et surtout sur son caractère aliénant, même une fois la journée finie est particulièrement juste.
En l'espace d'une soixantaine de pages, Bob Black propose donc une redéfinition du travail, mais fait aussi un constat un peu amer : pour mettre en place cette révolution ludique, il convient que chacun s'y mette. Ce à quoi on a envie de répondre : "Ok, mais qui va porter ce projet ? Comment faire table rase du monde du travail actuel ?"
Il semble assez peu probable que les oligarques qui profitent du système actuel soient très très chaud pour redistribuer ainsi les cartes.
N'en reste pas moins que ce livre est éclairant, au moins sur la réalité du monde du travail, et propose une vraie réflexion sur nos sociétés. Reste à savoir ce qui pourrait en ressortir. Les pistes proposées sont tentantes, mais demeurent difficiles à emprunter seul...
Ma critique est un brin embrouillée (en tout cas bien moins éclairante que la prose de Black), mais je ne saurai trop recommander la lecture de ce court pamphlet.
Bob Black est un anarchiste américain (rien que ça déjà, c'est fort), et il a écrit ce texte en 1985.
Dans ce pamphlet, il remet en cause la notion de travail, du moins le travail salarié tel que nous le connaissons dans le monde capitaliste. En effet, en bon anarchiste, il critique le travail lorsqu'il devient aliénant, c'est-à-dire dés que son exercice devient dicté par des impératifs bassement matérialistes (bouffe, loyer, etc...), et soumis au salariat.
Le travail y est donc présenté pour ce qu'il est : une activité contrainte, aliénante jusque dans les temps de loisirs qu'elle concède au travailleur puisque même une fois le travail terminé, nos vies s'organisent autour de la journée de travail à venir.
Bob Black milite pour une révolution ludique, où le travail ne serait plus un asservissement de l'individu, mais au contraire stimulerait la créativité (au sens large) des gens. Pour cela, il s'agirait, au contraire de ce qui se fait aujourd'hui, de limiter le temps de travail, et de ne le consacrer qu'aux tâches vraiment vitales.
En cela, on peut le rapprocher des théories de Paul Lafargue, le gendre de Karl Marx, qui militait pour le droit à la paresse, et une semaine de quatre heures de travail, durée suffisante pour que l'Humanité produise suffisamment pour se nourrir, loger et vêtir. Le reste du temps ainsi économisé serait consacré à l'épanouissement personnel via un travail non salarié, librement consenti et choisi.
L'idée de jeu n'y est pas vu ici sous sa forme de "loisir ludique" (type jeux de plateau, sport ou jeux de rôles par exemple), mais comme toute activité que l'on peut pratiquer pour le plaisir, en dehors de toute contrainte salariée. Bob Black cite par exemple le cas du jardinage, mais plus largement, il s'agirait de laisser tout un chacun choisir librement les activités auxquelles il souhaiterait s'adonner, même à petite doses, pour que leurs pratiques deviennent d'avantage un jeu qu'un travail.
Bob Black estime ainsi que si chacun pouvait dégager du temps pour lui, pour faire ce qui l'intéresse vraiment, émergerait une société du dilettantisme qui libérerait la créativité et la connaissance humaine.
La meilleure comparaison que Black puisse proposer tiens au sexe. Pour lui, l'archétype du jeu productif est la rencontre sexuelle, rencontre dans laquelle tout le monde donne et tout le monde reçoit, mais surtout activité pour laquelle plus on donne, plus on reçoit. En appliquant ce même principe au travail, dit-il, les meilleurs aspects de l'activité sexuelle s'appliqueront à tous les aspects de la vie quotidienne.
Ce texte, pour utopique qu'il soit, n'en est pas moins très bien argumenté, et pas du tout farfelu. Il pointe au contraire toutes les aberrations du système actuel qui tend à rendre le travail vain, pour ne pas dire chiant. Le constat qu'il dresse sur le monde du travail salarié, et surtout sur son caractère aliénant, même une fois la journée finie est particulièrement juste.
En l'espace d'une soixantaine de pages, Bob Black propose donc une redéfinition du travail, mais fait aussi un constat un peu amer : pour mettre en place cette révolution ludique, il convient que chacun s'y mette. Ce à quoi on a envie de répondre : "Ok, mais qui va porter ce projet ? Comment faire table rase du monde du travail actuel ?"
Il semble assez peu probable que les oligarques qui profitent du système actuel soient très très chaud pour redistribuer ainsi les cartes.
N'en reste pas moins que ce livre est éclairant, au moins sur la réalité du monde du travail, et propose une vraie réflexion sur nos sociétés. Reste à savoir ce qui pourrait en ressortir. Les pistes proposées sont tentantes, mais demeurent difficiles à emprunter seul...
Ma critique est un brin embrouillée (en tout cas bien moins éclairante que la prose de Black), mais je ne saurai trop recommander la lecture de ce court pamphlet.
September 29, 2015
Black's titular essay has the verve and wit to arrest even the casual reader. One example which comes to mind is the re-assertion of the right to be lazy. Nonetheless, Black's assertions on 'work' come from a fundamentally flawed conceptual conflation of alienated labor with labor as productive activity. For instance, its pitting of work against 'play' (which comes from a rich anarchist tradition of similar concepts) was given no concrete foundations or even examples. Black's 'play' might in fact be referring to un-alienated work, if such thing is possible in a system as total as capitalism. The term becomes much more problematic if we figure in the newer forms of labor such as freelance and online work where 'play' might manifest in the form of creativity [in finding work, in establishing an 'edge' over other workers, or even in 'hacking' one's own 'professional' identity]; when in actuality the apparent freedom to 'play' or even to avoid work glosses over the fundamental conditions which makes it necessary for individuals to use their 'creativity' just to survive. Another implication of Black's assertions is that it fails to figure in the possibility of finding satisfaction in doing hard or even life-endangering revolutionary work, which in fact can be considered 'ludic' in the more fundamental sense since it actively constructs the future space where 'ludic' experiences are set to spontaneously happen.
February 1, 2019
No, no es una invitación a la vagancia ni al oblomovismo. Es un llamado a la reflexión frente a las disimuladas cadenas de la obligación laboral impuestas por el modelo económico; a darnos cuenta de la falacia del "tiempo libre": un lapso que no es enteramente de disfrute sino la mezquina excusa para recuperarse del trabajo impuesto y dilatar así la aparición de averías en el "esclavo". Es también una invitación al juego, a la recreación productiva y creadora; al gusto y el disfrute de las actividades necesarias para sobrevivir, en las que podemos ser nosotros mismos, en libertad.
November 16, 2017
"La alternativa a trabajar no es el ocio sólamente. Ser lúdico no es ser estático. Aunque valoro el placer de la pereza, nunca es mas satisfactoria que cuando sirve de intermedio entre otros placeres y pasatiempos. Tampoco promuevo esa válvula de seguridad disciplinada y gerenciada llamada "tiempo libre"; nada de eso. El tiempo libre es no trabajar por el bien del trabajo. El tiempo libre es tiempo gastado en recobrarse del trabajo, y en el frenético pero inútil intento de olvidarse del trabajo. Mucha gente regresa de sus vacaciones tan agotada que desean volver al trabajo para descansar. La diferencia principal entre el tiempo libre y el trabajo es que al menos te pagan por tu alienación y agotamiento. "
March 16, 2025
Tot i la meva predisposició al compromís amb l'empresa i el client, a l'ètica del treball i al gaudí de feinejar i gestionar, o precisament per això, considero que llegir aquest llibre ha estat un encert. Per tots els addictes a la feina, és el llibre que heu de llegir per ajudar-vos a reflexionar sobre on us duu la inèrcia que porteu. No parar a pensar sobre per què, per qui i a costa de què venem la nostra força de treball o emprenem, és un greu error.
L'autoconeixement també ha d'escoltar les sàvies paraules de Bob Black.
M'agraden els llibres trencadors, rupturistes i radicals. Per això, me'l vaig llegir. I no va fallar. Tot i algun element que em sembla poc rigorós (la distribució del treball de la pagesia a l'Antic règim), em sembla un escrit molt ben pensat, plantejat i redactat. Un llibre disruptiu, necessari en una etapa del capitalisme occidental on l'autoexplotació és a l'ordre del dia (segons el filòsof Byung-Chul Han).
L'autoconeixement també ha d'escoltar les sàvies paraules de Bob Black.
M'agraden els llibres trencadors, rupturistes i radicals. Per això, me'l vaig llegir. I no va fallar. Tot i algun element que em sembla poc rigorós (la distribució del treball de la pagesia a l'Antic règim), em sembla un escrit molt ben pensat, plantejat i redactat. Un llibre disruptiu, necessari en una etapa del capitalisme occidental on l'autoexplotació és a l'ordre del dia (segons el filòsof Byung-Chul Han).
June 18, 2025
¿2'5?
El texto de Bob Black me ha interesado bastante más que el epílogo de Julius Van Daal.
En general, lo que cuenta me resulta interesante pero no nuevo (aunque supongo que tiene sentido por la fecha en la que se escribió, 1985, lo que probablemente tenga que ver también con que algunas ideas me hayan chirriado).
Quizás, también, se me ha quedado un poco corto en algunas explicaciones. Eso sí, tiene algunas frases potentes.
El texto de Bob Black me ha interesado bastante más que el epílogo de Julius Van Daal.
En general, lo que cuenta me resulta interesante pero no nuevo (aunque supongo que tiene sentido por la fecha en la que se escribió, 1985, lo que probablemente tenga que ver también con que algunas ideas me hayan chirriado).
Quizás, también, se me ha quedado un poco corto en algunas explicaciones. Eso sí, tiene algunas frases potentes.
May 21, 2023
Lo vi y dudé y el librero me dijo que era "lectura obligatoria para mantener viva la llama de la indignación, porque si no poco a poco el peso de la bota en la cabeza deja de sentirse tan doloroso."
Tengo la versión gráfica con ilustraciones de Bruno Borges, preciosa. Se lo presto a quien quiera, queridxs.
Ojito a la primera página:
"Nadie debería trabajar jamás. El trabajo es la fuente de casi todos los infortunios del mundo. Casi todos los males que conocemos derivan del trabajo o de vivir en un mundo diseñado para el trabajo. Para dejar de sufrir, tenemos que dejar de trabajar."
Tengo la versión gráfica con ilustraciones de Bruno Borges, preciosa. Se lo presto a quien quiera, queridxs.
Ojito a la primera página:
"Nadie debería trabajar jamás. El trabajo es la fuente de casi todos los infortunios del mundo. Casi todos los males que conocemos derivan del trabajo o de vivir en un mundo diseñado para el trabajo. Para dejar de sufrir, tenemos que dejar de trabajar."
February 25, 2018
You can never be the same after reading this. Black's rhetoric has a clean sharp edge. It goes straight to be point, with some dose of sarcasm and a lot of insightful provocation. (For another tone, different arguments and insights as good, read the great "Pour la vie" of Alexandra David-Néel.)
April 28, 2024
"És bastant extrany posicionar-se a favor dels obrers i en contra del treball, però podem fer-ho (...) el treball no és una cosa per què valgui la pena morir"
July 18, 2024
Bob Black is a moron and he sucks at writing.
******
Reread 5/16/2024
The biggest hole in Black's argument is that he assumes that in the absence of coerced work, people will find enough joy in those "truly necessary" activities (which he defines as those providing food, shelter, or clothing - more on that later) that we'd have enough to survive and thrive. The idea is that many people would find those activities nice for a short time, if not forced to do them, and that the sum of all those uncoerced efforts would clothe, feed, and house all of us. I simply don't find that convincing or compelling.
The next big hole is his assertion that only food, shelter, and clothing are work worth saving, and I, again, simply don't agree. If we were content to live a perfectly ascetic existence then sure, maybe, but presumably people would still enjoy pleasures like decorating their homes, taking road trips (Black argues that the auto industry should essentially be abolished), biking, traveling, etc etc. There are a million and one things that people enjoy that aren't strictly necessary, and personally, I would rather live in a system that requires us all to work in order to have access to those things than to not work and not have access to them.
Another hole - Black creates an argument for abolishing work based on a bunch of haphazard generalizations that do not apply to work throughout history, or even in present day. As an example, he claims that common, repetitive, "low skill" jobs dull the brain. Even if we accept that as true, will Black then make an exception for jobs like lawyers? Professors? Accountants? Researchers? And all the other jobs out there that are perfectly stimulating (even if they do not meet Black's definition of "useful")? What about shoemakers? Technicians? Electricians? Etc. etc.?
******
Reread 5/16/2024
The biggest hole in Black's argument is that he assumes that in the absence of coerced work, people will find enough joy in those "truly necessary" activities (which he defines as those providing food, shelter, or clothing - more on that later) that we'd have enough to survive and thrive. The idea is that many people would find those activities nice for a short time, if not forced to do them, and that the sum of all those uncoerced efforts would clothe, feed, and house all of us. I simply don't find that convincing or compelling.
The next big hole is his assertion that only food, shelter, and clothing are work worth saving, and I, again, simply don't agree. If we were content to live a perfectly ascetic existence then sure, maybe, but presumably people would still enjoy pleasures like decorating their homes, taking road trips (Black argues that the auto industry should essentially be abolished), biking, traveling, etc etc. There are a million and one things that people enjoy that aren't strictly necessary, and personally, I would rather live in a system that requires us all to work in order to have access to those things than to not work and not have access to them.
Another hole - Black creates an argument for abolishing work based on a bunch of haphazard generalizations that do not apply to work throughout history, or even in present day. As an example, he claims that common, repetitive, "low skill" jobs dull the brain. Even if we accept that as true, will Black then make an exception for jobs like lawyers? Professors? Accountants? Researchers? And all the other jobs out there that are perfectly stimulating (even if they do not meet Black's definition of "useful")? What about shoemakers? Technicians? Electricians? Etc. etc.?
May 27, 2022
Como muchos escritos anarquistas, este breve libro rezuma alegría por todas partes. No sé si me convence mucho su propuesta de una sociedad lúdica que acabe con la sociedad del trabajo, aunque, como sucede en muchos otros textos de este tipo, lo que sí resulta convincente es su crítica al trabajo como definición fundamental de la vida humana. En 1985, Black ya era más que consciente de las implicaciones que este modo de organización tenía no solo para la convivencia pacífica de los pueblos, sino también para el clima y para las lacras de la modernidad (el racismo, la represión sexual, la distinción de clases...). Hay frases bellísimamente escritas, así como una defensa de la labor no productiva que hacen que este libro sea enormemente disfrutable. Asoma también el miedo a que todo lo aparentemente improductivo caiga también en brazos de su capitalización, pero pronto se supera con las condiciones vitales que dará un futuro sin valor alguno de cambio. Necesita, eso sí, de una recreación algo nostálgica de la Antigüedad y de cierta tecnofobia para justificarse, pero creo que podría resolverse con una reinterpretación de «lo lúdico». Tal vez, si el término fuera «lo placentero común», las problemáticas del concepto quedarían de algún modo aplacadas.
«El arte dejaría de estar en manos de los esnobs y los coleccionistas, sería abolido como actividad especializada al servicio de un público de élite, y sus cualidades estéticas y creativas regresarían a la vida integral de la que el trabajo las robó».
«El arte dejaría de estar en manos de los esnobs y los coleccionistas, sería abolido como actividad especializada al servicio de un público de élite, y sus cualidades estéticas y creativas regresarían a la vida integral de la que el trabajo las robó».
August 29, 2008
Haiii... hanya ingin menginformasikan buku ini sudah diterjemahkan oleh seorang kawan dalam bahasa Indonesia dan sebentar lagi akan diterbitkan loh!
Tunggu aja yahhhh...
A "job" that might engage the energies of some people, for a reasonably limited time, for the fun of it, is just a burden on those who have to do it for forty hours a week with no say in how it should be done, for the profit of owners who contribute nothing to the project, and with no opportunity for sharing tasks or spreading the work among those who actually have to do it. This is the real world of work: a world of bureaucratic blundering, of sexual harassment and discrimination, of bonehead bosses exploiting and scapegoating their subordinates who -- by any rational-technical criteria -- should be calling the shots. But capitalism in the real world subordinates the rational maximization of productivity and profit to the exigencies of organizational control.
Because of work, no matter what we do we keep looking at out watches. The only thing "free" about so-called free time is that it doesn't cost the boss anything. Free time is mostly devoted to getting ready for work, going to work, returning from work, and recovering from work. Free time is a euphemism for the peculiar way labor as a factor of production not only transports itself at its own expense to and from the workplace but assumes primary responsibility for its own maintenance and repair.
So, to all workers of the world... relax!
Tunggu aja yahhhh...
A "job" that might engage the energies of some people, for a reasonably limited time, for the fun of it, is just a burden on those who have to do it for forty hours a week with no say in how it should be done, for the profit of owners who contribute nothing to the project, and with no opportunity for sharing tasks or spreading the work among those who actually have to do it. This is the real world of work: a world of bureaucratic blundering, of sexual harassment and discrimination, of bonehead bosses exploiting and scapegoating their subordinates who -- by any rational-technical criteria -- should be calling the shots. But capitalism in the real world subordinates the rational maximization of productivity and profit to the exigencies of organizational control.
Because of work, no matter what we do we keep looking at out watches. The only thing "free" about so-called free time is that it doesn't cost the boss anything. Free time is mostly devoted to getting ready for work, going to work, returning from work, and recovering from work. Free time is a euphemism for the peculiar way labor as a factor of production not only transports itself at its own expense to and from the workplace but assumes primary responsibility for its own maintenance and repair.
So, to all workers of the world... relax!
April 11, 2025
Written in 1985, this short and refreshing essay is a capsule of contained momentum. My first ever encounter with Bob Black, who dilates the space for controversy with a writing style that resembles a sudden and forceful thunderstorm. A torch, perhaps, in the right direction. Fundamental anarchy paves the way for a playful and stirring essay where it is made evident that work, paid work at least, is the source for this world’s misery. Induced in a productivity coma and numb to a collectivising understanding of the world, our existence has been capitalized to the tee. So has our own conception of time. The magnanimous fate promised by the capitalist approach is a hoax, as it’s been proven now and again. Black, with aspirations that I admit sound like a utopia one could only dream of, calls for a revolution that replaces work with a leisurely take on life. This isn’t an ode to lazyness (although in a way it is), but it is a call for what he calls a “playful revolution”. One that overflows with creativity, conviviality, nurturing and imagination. Although apparently simple, Black calls for a complete restructuring of mind, one that requires us to rethink the foundations of a system that’s breaking the world, transcending all prior compartmentalized notions we held of it. A timeless piece. This edition also includes one of french author Julius Van Daal’s essays, which avidly demystifies the organized form of labor and reveals some rotten truths about it.
January 16, 2023
El trabajo es la fuente de casi toda la miseria existente en el mundo. Casi todos los males que se pueden nombrar proceden del trabajo o de vivir en un mundo diseñado en función del trabajo. Para dejar de sufrir, hemos de dejar de trabajar.
Y esto no significa que tengamos que dejar de hacer cosas.
Un libro un poco hippie porque me esperaba reflexiones sobre la abolición del trabajo menos naifs, menos propias de una persona muy pequeña que al día siguiente tiene que ir al cole y no le gusta madrugar -sólo a él-. No he entendido la necesidad de ludificación; me gustaría haber leído algo más robusto, quizás, más con una alternativa mejor definida (luego he visto que el escritor es anarquista y ahí he entendido cosas).
Sin embargo, tiene frases interesantes relacionadas sobre cómo el trabajo vertebra nuestra forma de estar en el mundo: Debido al trabajo, y da igual el que sea, no paramos de mirar el reloj. Lo único que tiene de "libre" el tiempo llamado libre es que al jefe no le cuesta nada. Dedicamos la mayor parte del tiempo libre a prepararnos para trabajar, ir a trabajar, regresar de trabajar y reponernos de trabajar . O, incluso, " Lo que no dicen las estadísticas es que el trabajo abrevia las vidas de decenas de millones de personas: al fin y al cabo, el homicidio no es otra cosa".
December 14, 2018
Listened and read at the same time.
I've been experiencing these things in my profession for the longest time. Working in advertising I truly feel that I'm not very important, nor is the industry. This can be scaled very wide and the whole idea of work can be questioned.
Radical, beautiful ideas: without work equality, nature and man would thrive. Less traffic, less cars, less work-related deaths, less traffic-related deaths.... and more meaning in life.
I, for one, can not understand why I would need to sit at the office from 9 to 5, five days a week. I can do my work in fifth of the time – and then it doesn't feel like work. I actually practice this: I come and go as I please, work out of the office, take longer lunch breaks, try to break the rules. So far, so good – my boss and colleagues seem to be satisfied and I'm not as miserable as I could be.
Work as a meaning for life is very, very sad. Play on the other hand is beautiful.
Thanks Kaitsu for the recommendation. This truly is a book as it is so tight, no matter the page count or the fact that it really is a long essay. Length is overrated anyway.
I've been experiencing these things in my profession for the longest time. Working in advertising I truly feel that I'm not very important, nor is the industry. This can be scaled very wide and the whole idea of work can be questioned.
Radical, beautiful ideas: without work equality, nature and man would thrive. Less traffic, less cars, less work-related deaths, less traffic-related deaths.... and more meaning in life.
I, for one, can not understand why I would need to sit at the office from 9 to 5, five days a week. I can do my work in fifth of the time – and then it doesn't feel like work. I actually practice this: I come and go as I please, work out of the office, take longer lunch breaks, try to break the rules. So far, so good – my boss and colleagues seem to be satisfied and I'm not as miserable as I could be.
Work as a meaning for life is very, very sad. Play on the other hand is beautiful.
Thanks Kaitsu for the recommendation. This truly is a book as it is so tight, no matter the page count or the fact that it really is a long essay. Length is overrated anyway.
September 30, 2019
Short but important essay by an anarchist author that's still alive. Outlines the problems with our current capitalism, especially the hypocritical "freedom" of it.
Free print version: http://www.primitivism.com/abolition.htm
Free audio version: https://youtu.be/TGW0R0l0mS0
Free print version: http://www.primitivism.com/abolition.htm
Free audio version: https://youtu.be/TGW0R0l0mS0
August 30, 2015
Pretty much junk. Verbose text telling nothing. The rants of a quite banal middle aged man.
January 30, 2019
Some fiery takes
January 11, 2020
Refreshing hot takes. Solutions not to be taken literally, but as a goal we can slowly move towards.
October 8, 2021
many ideas can be extrapolated to the modern world, but oh my god, this guy is pontificating for like 6 1/2 pages about work being bad and never provides a real solution. fuuuuuuuck this lmao
August 9, 2022
this book is the beginning of an interesting conversation but doesn’t seem to draw any realistic or sustainable conclusions.
June 30, 2021
Es un manifiesto inspirador. Defiende la idea de que el trabajo, tal y como lo conocemos, es una forma de esclavitud y resulta humillante e indigno para el ser humano. Además, cree que las ideologías dominantes de la izquierda tradicional (marxismo), en el fondo han seguido apoyando el sistema actual de trabajo (con menos desigualdades, pero trabajo igual). También, que el ocio, tal y como se practica, es una forma indirecta de trabajo al estar sometido a reglas y obligaciones, con lo que acaba siendo igualmente agotador. Y que el trabajo, con sus tareas repetitivas en el que hay poco espacio para la reflexión y la creatividad, acaba por embrutecer a cualquier persona.
El autor propone una sociedad basada en el "juego" como alternativa al sistema actual. Entiendiéndose como tal el desarrollo de trabajos/actividades que se realizan de manera no forzada, espontánea y diversa (algo que se haga por gusto puede igualmente cansar cuando se repite excesivamente).
El defecto de este brevísimo ensayo es evidente. Necesita un andamiaje que sostenga la propuesta para que sea algo más que una bonita idea. No hay ejemplos concretos, ni datos ni nada que demuestre la viabilidad de una sociedad regida por el "juego". Es más una pataleta que una verdadera alternativa. Además, al ser el autor estadounidense, también peca de contener únicamente referencias a su país.
El autor propone una sociedad basada en el "juego" como alternativa al sistema actual. Entiendiéndose como tal el desarrollo de trabajos/actividades que se realizan de manera no forzada, espontánea y diversa (algo que se haga por gusto puede igualmente cansar cuando se repite excesivamente).
El defecto de este brevísimo ensayo es evidente. Necesita un andamiaje que sostenga la propuesta para que sea algo más que una bonita idea. No hay ejemplos concretos, ni datos ni nada que demuestre la viabilidad de una sociedad regida por el "juego". Es más una pataleta que una verdadera alternativa. Además, al ser el autor estadounidense, también peca de contener únicamente referencias a su país.
May 11, 2023
"El trabajo es la fuente de casi toda la miseria existente en el mundo. Casi todos los males que se pueden nombrar proceden del trabajo o de vivir en un mundo diseñado en función del trabajo. Para dejar de sufrir, hemos de dejar de trabajar"
May 26, 2021
Un libro correcto con algunas frases magistrales. Plantea una utopía hermosa. Cuestiona la definición de trabajo. Apela a un mundo sin empleo pero con muchas cosas para hacer. Es un manifiesto para tener en cuenta. Una guía para cualquier trabajador con conciencia de clase.
December 1, 2021
A mix of really interesting, thought-provoking essays and meaningless parodies. Useful to get a better idea of what a “true anarchist” is about.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 143 reviews