What do you think?
Rate this book
Free Time: The Forgotten American Dream
Has the American Dream become an unrealistic utopian fantasy, or have we simply forgotten what we are working for? In his topical book, "Free Time," Benjamin Kline Hunnicutt examines the way that progress, once defined as more of the good things in life as well as more free time to enjoy them, has come to be understood only as economic growth and more work, forevermore. Hunnicutt provides an incisive intellectual, cultural, and political history of the original American Dream from the colonial days to the present. Taking his cue from Walt Whitman's higher progress, he follows the traces of that dream, cataloging the myriad voices that prepared for and lived in an opening realm of freedom. "Free Time" reminds Americans of the forgotten, best part of the American Dream-that more and more of our lives might be lived freely, with an enriching family life, with more time to enjoy nature, friendship, and the adventures of the mind and of the spirit.
251 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2007
12 people are currently reading
513 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 - 11 of 11 reviews
September 6, 2022
This book helped answer a question that's plagued me for a while. In 1930, John Maynard Keynes famously predicted that his grandchildren might work 15 hours per week – why did that seem plausible, and why didn't it come true? The basic story the author outlines is that throughout American history, labor reacted to gains in productivity by demanding higher wages and shorter working hours. There were some interesting economic arguments that went along with the demand for progressively shorter hours – that increased leisure time would increase demand, stimulating economic growth, and that sharing the work (fewer hours for more people) was the only way to fight unemployment as machinery took away jobs. Beyond these pragmatic arguments, however, was a vision of "Higher Progress" whereby Americans would live ever greater parts of their lives outside of the confines of the capitalist marketplace, getting to grips with the things that really matter in life – engaging with community, nature, self-improvement, etc.
By the turn of the 20th century, businessmen were pushing back against the threat that increased leisure represented to industrial capitalism, promoting a secular work ethic (work as its own reward and the center of a human life, rather than a means to a higher purpose) and a vision of ever-increasing consumption. The turning point came in the Great Depression. Work sharing was initially seen as the response to unemployment, and in 1933 the Senate passed a bill mandating a 30-hour workweek. Before it passed the House, however, the Roosevelt administration changed its mind, instead promoting what Hunnicutt calls "Full-Time, Full Employment":
"According to the new vision, progress would no longer be understood as higher wages and shorter hours but as a constantly improving material standard of living with ‘full-time’ (newly defined as a forty-hour week) jobs for all, supported by new government programs and policies. Roosevelt committed government to do whatever it would take to create enough new work in the public and private sectors of the economy to replace the work taken by new technology."
Since then, the push for shorter hours has ebbed away, with the labor movement signing up for the capitalist vision of ever-higher wages to promote an ever-higher "standard of living" (which is to say higher levels of consumption, not higher quality of life). It also adopted the glorification of work as its own source of value and abandoned its economic arguments for shorter hours as a hedge against unemployment. Leisure came to be seen not as an inherent good, but as the refuge of the lazy.
The book itself is a bit uneven – it's fairly dry academic writing, and it spends a lot of time digging into the ideological history of the movement towards progressively shorter working hours (sections on Walt Whitman & Frank Lloyd Wright seemed unnecessary). But it does a good job reviving a lost thread in American history – that individual and societal progress wasn't always coterminous with economic growth.
It was particularly interesting in comparison to The Deficit Myth: Modern Monetary Theory and the Birth of the People's Economy. Hunnicutt is inherently skeptical of government's role in the economy, seeing Keynesian countercyclical intervention as a capitalist overreach impeding the natural effect of increasing mechanization leading to less need for labor leading to shorter working hours for all. MMT, on the other hand, treats a 40-hour job as an inherent good and sees government's role as guaranteeing that to all citizens to smooth out cyclical unemployment. Maybe there's room to stake out some middle ground – government leading a transition to a shorter workweek while standing prepared to backstop economic turbulence that might result?
By the turn of the 20th century, businessmen were pushing back against the threat that increased leisure represented to industrial capitalism, promoting a secular work ethic (work as its own reward and the center of a human life, rather than a means to a higher purpose) and a vision of ever-increasing consumption. The turning point came in the Great Depression. Work sharing was initially seen as the response to unemployment, and in 1933 the Senate passed a bill mandating a 30-hour workweek. Before it passed the House, however, the Roosevelt administration changed its mind, instead promoting what Hunnicutt calls "Full-Time, Full Employment":
"According to the new vision, progress would no longer be understood as higher wages and shorter hours but as a constantly improving material standard of living with ‘full-time’ (newly defined as a forty-hour week) jobs for all, supported by new government programs and policies. Roosevelt committed government to do whatever it would take to create enough new work in the public and private sectors of the economy to replace the work taken by new technology."
Since then, the push for shorter hours has ebbed away, with the labor movement signing up for the capitalist vision of ever-higher wages to promote an ever-higher "standard of living" (which is to say higher levels of consumption, not higher quality of life). It also adopted the glorification of work as its own source of value and abandoned its economic arguments for shorter hours as a hedge against unemployment. Leisure came to be seen not as an inherent good, but as the refuge of the lazy.
The book itself is a bit uneven – it's fairly dry academic writing, and it spends a lot of time digging into the ideological history of the movement towards progressively shorter working hours (sections on Walt Whitman & Frank Lloyd Wright seemed unnecessary). But it does a good job reviving a lost thread in American history – that individual and societal progress wasn't always coterminous with economic growth.
It was particularly interesting in comparison to The Deficit Myth: Modern Monetary Theory and the Birth of the People's Economy. Hunnicutt is inherently skeptical of government's role in the economy, seeing Keynesian countercyclical intervention as a capitalist overreach impeding the natural effect of increasing mechanization leading to less need for labor leading to shorter working hours for all. MMT, on the other hand, treats a 40-hour job as an inherent good and sees government's role as guaranteeing that to all citizens to smooth out cyclical unemployment. Maybe there's room to stake out some middle ground – government leading a transition to a shorter workweek while standing prepared to backstop economic turbulence that might result?
December 11, 2020
A fascinating, subversive, critical look at American culture and what the author argues is a twisted perversion of the idea of America dreamt up by our founding fathers. A history of the labor movement and by extension, how our culture thinks about the role of one's career in their life. Until around FDR and the Great Depression the labor movement had two main aims - higher wages and shorter hours. The latter was often framed as important for what is called "Higher Progress," or the pursuit of personal growth during your leisure hours. The author highlights various thought leaders throughout history, though it is hard to know how influential some of them were and whether the author picked them to support his theory, who argued for the critical need for more free time for people to be truly happy. He claims that during the formation of the US there was an understanding that in order for democracy to be successful, we needed a citizenry who was devoted to their community and enlightenment (and had the free time to it). For a long time there was a belief that machines would bring about a time of abundance, people's basic needs would be satisfied, and there would be no need to work more than a few hours a day.
Long story short, FDR flipped the script and began to push for everyone's right to a job, a full-time job, and he used every lever at his disposal to ensure the economy was producing enough for everyone to work a full time job. Mix that with consumerism, advertising, and our evident insatiable thirst for shopping, and over the last 5-7 decades the shorter hour movement died a slow death until today the idea of full-time employment as gospel is complete. And now we find ourselves at the nadir of Higher Progress: a populace whose critical thinking skills have been so dulled by consumerism and lack of personal attainment they are lost in ridiculous conspiracy theories and unhinged from truth, people are consuming so much our planet is buckling under the weight, people seem unhappy and trying to fill the gaps with more of the poison that got us here (money/success/goods), and 70M people voted for a man whose only real pitch was that he was rich, famous, and successful and therefore could be trusted. This book, written before 2016, was prescient, and in hindsight shows that Trump is a reflection of us, of our core values and a political and spiritual life that puts economic growth above all else. Trump is a cartoonish exaggeration of us, distilled down into a vile, poisonous concentrate, our Frankenstein.
Long story short, FDR flipped the script and began to push for everyone's right to a job, a full-time job, and he used every lever at his disposal to ensure the economy was producing enough for everyone to work a full time job. Mix that with consumerism, advertising, and our evident insatiable thirst for shopping, and over the last 5-7 decades the shorter hour movement died a slow death until today the idea of full-time employment as gospel is complete. And now we find ourselves at the nadir of Higher Progress: a populace whose critical thinking skills have been so dulled by consumerism and lack of personal attainment they are lost in ridiculous conspiracy theories and unhinged from truth, people are consuming so much our planet is buckling under the weight, people seem unhappy and trying to fill the gaps with more of the poison that got us here (money/success/goods), and 70M people voted for a man whose only real pitch was that he was rich, famous, and successful and therefore could be trusted. This book, written before 2016, was prescient, and in hindsight shows that Trump is a reflection of us, of our core values and a political and spiritual life that puts economic growth above all else. Trump is a cartoonish exaggeration of us, distilled down into a vile, poisonous concentrate, our Frankenstein.
July 10, 2024
I really enjoyed the last 2 chapters of this book. I expected most the book to be composed of similar topics. The long history of labor and unions was a bit dry for me, though certainly thorough.
November 12, 2019
For idlers! A survey of the labor movements attempts and then failures to secure a foothold on the path towards Whitman's idea of "Higher Progress". This is not an economic text, but it offers up a range of cases where shortening work hours or work weeks was fought for, desired by the working class, or, in a few cases, implemented. Great for self-reflection about your own Higher Progress.
December 5, 2021
I wanted to like this more than I did. It went a little too dry & too pedantically into the weeds for me in terms of the late 19th/early 20th century movement for shorter work hours, and Roosevelt's push back with the 'full-time, full employment' narrative of the American dream that eventually won out as the norm.
At the same time, I feel this is really important lost history we need to reclaim.
Kinda depressing though that one of the arguments against leisure and shorter work hours was that people would "just waste" it. We're hearing the same argument about why we can't have UBI today. What is so bad about wasting time? Sometimes people just need to lounge about. We need to get deeper than "higher progress" and the idea that people should have leisure time so they can "make something better of themselves." We need to get beyond the idea of 'spending' or 'investing' time at all times, and letting it be okay to merely pass time.
I'm also not 100% buying - especially in the contemporary moment - the idea that consumerism drives our need to work more. Maybe it does, but today, two people working full time still can't afford to buy a basic home in a major western city. So that felt a little dated in the conclusion that brings it more to modern times.
Still, I'd like to read this again. The audiobook narrator voice was like a golden age radio announcer type voice and I found it extremely annoying. I'd do better with this one in text.
At the same time, I feel this is really important lost history we need to reclaim.
Kinda depressing though that one of the arguments against leisure and shorter work hours was that people would "just waste" it. We're hearing the same argument about why we can't have UBI today. What is so bad about wasting time? Sometimes people just need to lounge about. We need to get deeper than "higher progress" and the idea that people should have leisure time so they can "make something better of themselves." We need to get beyond the idea of 'spending' or 'investing' time at all times, and letting it be okay to merely pass time.
I'm also not 100% buying - especially in the contemporary moment - the idea that consumerism drives our need to work more. Maybe it does, but today, two people working full time still can't afford to buy a basic home in a major western city. So that felt a little dated in the conclusion that brings it more to modern times.
Still, I'd like to read this again. The audiobook narrator voice was like a golden age radio announcer type voice and I found it extremely annoying. I'd do better with this one in text.
December 12, 2013
If only things were this simple. I don't think we can go back. Unfortunately.
January 27, 2025
In some ways, this book is its own worst enemy, and in the same way, a chronicle of how the left is its own worst enemy.
It does provide an exhaustive history of labor's old twin pillar of shorter hours that went alongside higher wages. However, it also hitches that cart to an out of touch poetic left, easily caricatured as childish and wanting to frolic in the flowers instead of "working for a living like the rest of us." The chapters on Walt Whitman and Frank Lloyd Wright would be downright alienating to anyone not well-versed in the extremely touchy feely. It's not hard to see why this cause stopped gaining ground when this book rushes past practical arguments to instead focus on things like "the art of play."
The case for free time must be made as a practical necessity. Because for the greater good, it is one. Family, education, community, and democracy all suffer without free time. It's our duty to defend it so we can use it for these goods. This book reflects a lot of sentiment like that, but never in a powerful, sharp way. It mostly just becomes a chronicle of free time's demise. As the decades pass by, the arguments for it become more vague, more feminized, more quaint. As important as the whimsical side of free time is, we'll only lose ground unless we voice more practical arguments with conviction.
It does provide an exhaustive history of labor's old twin pillar of shorter hours that went alongside higher wages. However, it also hitches that cart to an out of touch poetic left, easily caricatured as childish and wanting to frolic in the flowers instead of "working for a living like the rest of us." The chapters on Walt Whitman and Frank Lloyd Wright would be downright alienating to anyone not well-versed in the extremely touchy feely. It's not hard to see why this cause stopped gaining ground when this book rushes past practical arguments to instead focus on things like "the art of play."
The case for free time must be made as a practical necessity. Because for the greater good, it is one. Family, education, community, and democracy all suffer without free time. It's our duty to defend it so we can use it for these goods. This book reflects a lot of sentiment like that, but never in a powerful, sharp way. It mostly just becomes a chronicle of free time's demise. As the decades pass by, the arguments for it become more vague, more feminized, more quaint. As important as the whimsical side of free time is, we'll only lose ground unless we voice more practical arguments with conviction.
October 24, 2024
This book offers a captivating and critical examination of American culture, particularly the distortion of the American Dream as envisioned by the founding fathers. The author delves into the history of the labor movement, emphasizing its dual goals of higher wages and shorter working hours—two aspirations that resonate deeply with contemporary discussions about work-life balance.
The narrative explores how, up until the era of FDR and the Great Depression, the labor movement framed the quest for shorter hours not just as a matter of economic necessity but as essential for "Higher Progress," the pursuit of personal growth during leisure time. This perspective is refreshing, as it challenges the prevailing notion that individual and societal advancement must always align with economic growth.
Overall, this book is a fascinating and enriching read for anyone interested in the intersections of labor, culture, and the evolving American identity. It challenges us to rethink our assumptions about work and happiness in a society that often equates worth with productivity.
The narrative explores how, up until the era of FDR and the Great Depression, the labor movement framed the quest for shorter hours not just as a matter of economic necessity but as essential for "Higher Progress," the pursuit of personal growth during leisure time. This perspective is refreshing, as it challenges the prevailing notion that individual and societal advancement must always align with economic growth.
Overall, this book is a fascinating and enriching read for anyone interested in the intersections of labor, culture, and the evolving American identity. It challenges us to rethink our assumptions about work and happiness in a society that often equates worth with productivity.
September 7, 2024
So good, so interesting, but dense... very dense. I had to return to the library before I finished, but I'll have to check it out again because it was so interesting.
May 27, 2015
"Free people choosing more freedom is the best hope for the future."
March 11, 2016
An amazing work!
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews