Wendell Berry Reading Group No. 1 - Horse Drawn Tools and the Doctrine of Labor Saving

A new reading group

Photo by Jonathan Jensen on Unsplash

Welcome to the first Wendell Berry Guided Reading Group. Every month I shall post a new WBGR post on an essay from the book The World Ending Fire. The aim of these posts is to get us thinking more deeply about Berry’s work, about how his writings apply to our lives, and how they can help us navigate the challenges (and opportunities) of the modern world.

One area which has been highlighted recently is the need to apply Berry’s thought to the city. These reflections, therefore, whilst retaining the agricultural and rural focus that Berry has in his writings, will additionally contain questions and reflections with direct application to the city and urban areas.

The comments are open for discussion about the essay, the questions, and applications (and any other thoughts and observations you may have) and I will endeavour to respond to as many of them as I can.

This first post is free. Future posts will be for paid subscribers. I thank all subscribers for their support so far and all my essays will continue to remain free (of which I have a few in the pipeline to be published soon).

And now on to the questions.

---

In this first guided reading post, we shall be considering Berry’s essay Horse Drawn Tools and the Doctrine of Labor Saving. You will get the most benefit if you read the essay and the questions below concurrently, but if you prefer to read the essay first and then attempt the questions that is also fine.

1. Berry notes “how well-designed and durable” (152) the horse-drawn tools he acquired are. Why do you think this is the case compared to modern tools? How strongly do the time in which they were produced and the means of locomotion they are designed for contribute to their quality?

2. Application: What are the benefits of buying well-designed and durable tools? List as many as you can under two headings: Personal benefit and benefit to others. What tools, utensils, and products could commit to buying better quality going forward? (See my essay To Buy is to Give.)

3. Berry argues the coming of the tractor allowed the farmer to do more work but not better work (153). Do you agree with this? Are there any exceptions to this statement?

4. Application: In what other areas of society can we see the relationship between more work resulting in poorer work? Does this dynamic play out in your vocation?

5. Berry writes “the coming of a tool, then, can be a cultural event of great power and influence” (153). In what ways did the arrival of the tractor change the farming world? Applying this further, in what ways has the arrival of the personal car changed our urban spaces?

6. One could argue that increased speed and efficiency is necessary for our modern food systems in order to feed a growing population. Therefore, reducing the quality of farm work/produce is a necessary price to pay for more quantity. How far do you agree with this statement? How do you think Berry would respond?

7. Do you agree with Berry’s rule of thumb “that a good tool is one that makes it possible to work faster and better than before”? (153) Is there anything else you would add to the rule? And what caveats are necessary?

8. Application: Berry suggests there is a point of optimum equilibrium between speed and quality - beyond this point, increased speed of work results in poorer quality. How can we identify when we are getting near to breaching this point in our work? Are there aspects of your job or vocation that you need to slow down in? How can you achieve this in a society that is centred around speed and sees ever-increasing efficiency as a virtue? (it will most likely involve a significant degree of ‘counterculturalness’)

9. What consequences has increased speed wrought on our agricultural landscapes? List as many as you can. Do the same for our urban environments.

10. In the extended quote from Evans, The Horse in the Furrow, (154) the wise farmers who acquire land “prove the land first” before planting anything, testing the land and seeing what it is good and fit for. Why is this a wise practice and why does it involve taking a long time? What is special about the nature of a field which means this process of testing and proving is necessary for good work? (think about the ‘particularities’/uniqueness of each field).

11. Before reading on in the essay consider these two questions: 1) How would you define labour saving? 2) Now consider how the corporations who market and produce labour-saving tools define labour-saving. Is there a difference between your two definitions? If so, what is the fundamental difference?

12. Berry argues the corporation’s aim in labour saving was never the saving of human labour but rather the replacement and displacement of it (155). How far do you agree with this argument?

13. Application: the contemporary issue of AI and ChatCPT has been in the news recently. Reflect on what jobs are under threat from displacement and replacement by these ultimate labour-saving devices. What might the results be to society from the widespread rollout of AI and the concurrent loss of human jobs?

14. How is it that society has come in the words of Berry to “value the development of machines far over the value of the development of people”? (156) What collective and individual ambitions, values, and goals does this attitude expose?

15. Berry now adds a vital caveat to his rule of thumb - that a tool must have “a healthy social purpose” (156). Does this correspond to your thoughts and answers to question 9?

16. Berry argues from his thought experiment (156) that if we valued the human life of farms and farm communities more than economic development then we would have “accepted certain mechanical and economic limits”. Do you agree that limits are essential for human flourishing? What limits might we have imposed in 1945? (carrying on from the time frame of Berry’s thought experiment).

    List 5 limits and give reasons for why these limits are necessary AND if there should be any circumstantial exceptions/caveats to these limits.

17. The crucial insight in the essay is the need to use saved labour in the same place in which we saved it. (157) Why does this have the potential to be so important when considering the following objectives for a farm: productivity, sustainability, and culture? How does the theory of marginal gains integrate with Berry’s insight?

18. Application: how can you reinvest time and energy in your work? What tasks could you do that you have always wanted to do but haven’t found the time? Why might fulfilling these tasks bring rich rewards?

19. Berry wishes to distinguish between anonymous workers in a factory and workers within a local community who know each other intimately (157). What difference does it make to work/vocation if the workers, their employers, and those they are serving know each other outside of the workplace/live together in the same community? Can this relational form of vocation exist in a city?

20. Berry lists four areas where saved labour can be spent: 1) leisure 2) small (and large) farm improvements and projects 3) Specialised crafts for the benefit of the community 4) improving home and family life (158). For each option explain what benefits to the individual, their family, and the community may be gained from investing time and energy in these areas. Also, consider how these benefits may ripple out beyond the boundaries of the local community.

21. Berry ends with countering the critique that he wants to “return to the past” by saying he has been challenging and critiquing the past in order to make plain the choice we now have about how to use technology and that this choice “depends on our willingness to limit our desires as well as the scale and kind of technology we use to satisfy them.” (158)

    Considering Berry’s advice here and the reality that we live in a society which is on the cusp of radical technological transformations (AI, transhumanism, chatCPT), and using your reflections on the questions above, consider these closing questions: how are you going to respond to future technological advances? How will you engage with these technologies (embrace, moderate, restrict, refuse)? What safeguards are you going to put in place?

    I look forward to reading your thoughts and answers in the comments below.

    Recording of the Zoom session for paid subscribers