> Hard work looks different if there's no where to go
The essay assumes a lot about who the reader is and the type of work they're doing. This perspective on work is obviously utterly alien to a single parent who's a dental assistant, part-time wait staff, has two young kids, and is barely making ends meet. But that person works a hell of a lot harder than any startup founder I've ever met. For them, the answer to "how to do hard work" is simpler: remember your kids starve and go homeless if you don't. Then, get up, go to work, and do what you're told. Continue until you have enough to pay the rent, buy food, and pay the baby sitters. Remember how lucky you are to have a roof and food. Repeat.
On one hand, I understand exactly what PG is saying -- the sort of work that requires high productivity without anyone telling you to work feels way harder than straight forward wage labor. There's a reason people drop out of phd programs and intentionally seek out specifically boring & predictable engineering/sales jobs (see: the post from the cmu undergrad).
On the other hand, I completely understand how the idea that autonomy and ownership over your own labor makes work harder -- and bragging about working 7 days a week for two whole years -- must seem incredibly tone-deaf to someone who has no choice but to do long days for 7 days a week under abusive management for 18+ years, only to get a reprieve of merely working 8-10 hour days for the 25-30 years after the kids are grown up and move away.
But PG isn't writing to that audience. The primary audience for many of his essays are people like him: guys who grew up geeky in upper middle class suburbs. There's nothing wrong with writing for the audience, but he does a kind-of bad job at signposting the fact that his advice is utterly irrelevant to the 50+% of the population that never have the opportunity to invest in themselves.
But PG isn't writing to that audience. The primary audience for many of his essays are people like him: guys who grew up geeky in upper middle class suburbs. There's nothing wrong with writing for the audience, but he does a kind-of bad job at signposting the fact that this is the target for his advice.
If that's his audience, perhaps a better essay would be, "Look you've got it pretty easy in life already, don't blow it (and even if you do, you'll probably have a second/third/fourth chance)", not: "listen to me about how to work hard because I know", because I haven't been convinced that he knows.
The essay assumes a lot about who the reader is and the type of work they're doing. This perspective on work is obviously utterly alien to a single parent who's a dental assistant, part-time wait staff, has two young kids, and is barely making ends meet. But that person works a hell of a lot harder than any startup founder I've ever met. For them, the answer to "how to do hard work" is simpler: remember your kids starve and go homeless if you don't. Then, get up, go to work, and do what you're told. Continue until you have enough to pay the rent, buy food, and pay the baby sitters. Remember how lucky you are to have a roof and food. Repeat.
On one hand, I understand exactly what PG is saying -- the sort of work that requires high productivity without anyone telling you to work feels way harder than straight forward wage labor. There's a reason people drop out of phd programs and intentionally seek out specifically boring & predictable engineering/sales jobs (see: the post from the cmu undergrad).
On the other hand, I completely understand how the idea that autonomy and ownership over your own labor makes work harder -- and bragging about working 7 days a week for two whole years -- must seem incredibly tone-deaf to someone who has no choice but to do long days for 7 days a week under abusive management for 18+ years, only to get a reprieve of merely working 8-10 hour days for the 25-30 years after the kids are grown up and move away.
But PG isn't writing to that audience. The primary audience for many of his essays are people like him: guys who grew up geeky in upper middle class suburbs. There's nothing wrong with writing for the audience, but he does a kind-of bad job at signposting the fact that his advice is utterly irrelevant to the 50+% of the population that never have the opportunity to invest in themselves.