Arlie Hochschild and Richard Florida

¶ … Arlie Hochschild and Richard Florida have written essays details how capitalism has caused deeply entrenched cultural changes in American social life. In her essay Out of the Frying Pan..., Hochschild focuses on how capitalism has wrought changes in intimate life, such as family relations. Richard Florida, in contrast, takes a macro-sociological approach, stating that capitalism has resulted in nothing less than the creation of a new social class.

This paper looks at the possibilities of synthesizing both approaches. The first part of the paper summarizes Florida's ambitious and optimistic discussion of a new socio-economic class - the creative class. The next part of this paper looks at Hochschild's argument that women's advances in terms of "equal rights" in public life were not matched by changes in private life. As a result, instead of true progress, many women merely found themselves out of the frying pan, and perhaps, into another frying pan.

In the conclusion, this paper argues that as an economic system, capitalism has resulted in an erosion of freedom for people - especially women in the private, intimate sphere.

While capitalism has resulted in much progress in terms of work and leisure, these advantages are more readily-reaped by male members of what Florida termed the "creative class. On the other hand, women and other members of what Florida terms the "working class" and the "service class" either fail to benefit or even see erosions of their freedom. Countering such losses requires that we understand these lost freedoms in the first place, and re-learn to prioritize the tasks that were previously valued in the private sphere.

Florida's recasting of Marx

Orthodox Marxism sees society as divided into two major classes -- the capital-owning bourgeosie and the labor-based proletariat. For Florida, these categories reflect signifiers that were relevant during the Industrial Age and the era of manufacturing. In a post-modern society, knowledge has become the signifier. Thus, argues Florida, social divisions are better-described by the categories of the creative class, the working class and the service class. Instead of labor, Florida states that "the rise of human creativity as the key factor in our economy and society" (4).

For Florida, these new divisions herald a more inclusive form of capitalism, as "heretofore excluded groups of eccentrics and non-conformists" (6) now had marketable skills. These are the very people who will thrive in the new workplace, as "an older corporate-centered system defined by large companies to a more people-driven one" (6).

Traditionally valued skills such as management and business acuity are now taking a backseat to "creative" skills such as innovation.

For the 38 million of this new Creative Class, there will be significant changes in old concepts regarding work and leisure. The creative class, observes Florida, is could "never be forced to work, yet they were never truly not at work" (12). These new workplaces are therefore much more amenable to creative work. Florida also sees new "experiential lifestyles," where people can engage in their numerous interests (13). A member of the creative class, for example, can be a writer/jazz musician/cyclist/researcher. This combination of interests is an indulgence that the previous corporate-based economy could not accommodate.

The most important development, however, is can be seen in what Florida calls the "blurring of time" (14). People are no longer working their parents' workday. Rather, they are working more hours, though often not within the confines of their home. People are also working more intensely during their younger years, another difference from just a generation ago.

Overall, Florida sees these as positive developments. While there are losses associated with these new workplaces, the growing premium placed on creative endeavors has allowed previously excluded people into the mainstream, and has allowed them to do so without giving up their myriad of interests.

What about the women?

Hochschild's account is not as optimistic as Florida's. For Hochschild, capitalism has indeed resulted in changes in the way people conduct their work and leisure. While Florida sees a major change from a corporate-based to a people-driven capitalism, Hochschild argues that capitalism remains intact. In fact, in American society, capitalism has assumed the dimensions of religion. This can be seen in how "the cathedrals of capitalism" have come to dominate our work and increasingly, our leisure. When not at work, we are shopping, watching television, engaging in planned vacations and similar leisure activities. All these activities are oriented towards another capitalistic pursuit -- consumption.

Hochschild's essay challenges Florida's assertions that the new form of capitalism is more inclusive and allows more opportunities for self-expression and self-fulfillment. As proof, she cites how many aspects of family life have become more grounded in hassle. "With all these activities," writes Hochschild, "family time could be called hurried or crowded." Instead of the workplace changing to accommodate family needs, it seems that the institution of the family is taking on the structured and timed characteristics of the workplace.

Hochschild focuses further on how women have been affected by these economic changes. Florida's writings imply that people who are members of the creative class -- male or female -- can reap advantages in terms of time and leisure activities. Hochschild points out, however, that women in the workforce are often constrained by the lack of policies that accommodate their other duties. There is, observes Hochschild, "the overall absence of government or workplace policies that foster the use of parental leave or shorter, more flexible hours."