Post 1: Projective Cities Among Us
The ever-evolving tech sector is a perfect representation of the projective city as coined by Boltanski and Chiapello in 1999. This hypothetical city structure formulates the rise of capitalism and additionally, the ability for networks to exist, creating an interconnected web of flexible networks that thrive off the capitalistic mindset. (Boltanski & Chiapello, 1999, ch. 2)
Boltakanski and Chiapello discussed this concept 20 years ago and as Mellon describes, the tech industry is rapidly changing, with information barely staying relevant from decade to decade. Remarkably though, the ideology of the projective city recognized 20 years ago, is still relevant and applicable to the current market, and particularly to the Waterloo region tech sector.
In the simplest sense, this event held by Communitech is the perfect example of a projective city. The projective city thrives off the high status the networks create, the recognition of competence and intelligence is something that draws people to the network. (Boltanski & Chiapello, 1999, 116). While tickets to the event were public, the topics, concepts, speakers and clientele, create an upscale network of interconnected individuals.
An interesting topic to look at is this changing idea of labour. Boltanski and Chiapello talk about how labour within the projective city is measured by productivity, not by quantitative measures, such as hours, or pay. (Boltanski & Chiapello, 1999, p. 109) Similarly today, Christine Robinson, who was present at Communitech’s event discussed how changing times have led to the decrease of full-time jobs, and the increase of individuals who add substantial value to the team through their skill set. (Pedro, 2019) This is just one of the many ways in which the concept of the projective city is being seen in Canada’s tech market today. See this photo for an idea of what the job market is looking like today in terms of precarious work.
When considering power, I personally feel that this type of environment would facilitate either network power or network-making power. The projective city in itself is the network power as it acts as a hub for social interaction. But the people within the projective city have network-making power as projective cities are not mutually exclusive, and members can belong to multiple groups.
In closing, it is clear that Boltanski & Chiapello’s concept of the projective city has proved effective and continues to be a relevant concept in today’s tech and business sector.
Question: Is this new precarious nature of work just expected from our generation? Is contract work going to be the new norm, how will this affect us as the upcoming generation?
I really liked how you connected the concept of the projective city to the local employment structure. To answer your question, I do believe that this type of precarious work is to be expected from our generation. We are currently living in a world reflective of a projective city based on our productivity and skill sets. As technology has advanced and network formations have become more available than ever, people no longer need a full-time job with security and pension. For example, social media has allowed people to connect in more ways than ever possible and has led to many individuals finding work through sustaining online connections. This is clearly evident if we examine YouTube stars and Instagram influencers. These so called 'jobs' don't require a certain set of hours or stability but instead rely on the maintenance of social relationships and skills to keep engagement up. Obviously, not everyone is going to become a YouTube star or an Instagram influencer but these types of precarious work are being embedded within society.
ReplyDeleteI do think that technological advancements and the ease of connecting to others, will only continue to eliminate forms of job security. This type of precarious work has made such an impact in society that people are now able to work from their homes - almost slowly weeding people out of their jobs by physically taking them out of the office.
It seems that this generation places more value on what skills and abilities people have rather than what wages they earn. It seems more impressive to a certain extent to list off different jobs and skills garnered from them rather than state your ability and skill within one area.
In terms of work contracts, I do think that contract work will continue to exist in society and may increase but not to the extent of becoming a new norm. There are too many professions that exist which require full-time stability such as Doctors and Lawyers. These are professions that require years of education and training of skills. Thus, it seems highly unlikely that such professions would employ contract hiring practices. However, this does not mean the individual would stay - it appears that within this projective city, people actually want to leave their professions and keep their lives fresh by generating new skills and creating new experiences. Personally, I know of 3 people in my family that are currently switching their profession because they are 'bored' and want something 'new to learn.'
As such, I do believe that we are currently living in a projective society because people are increasingly plateauing in their lives and turn to switching careers as an easy solution for something new. However, I don't believe this will completely reshape whether or not contract work will become more prevalent.
Hi Maya,
ReplyDeleteWith regards to your question, I believe that precarious labour has both positive and negative traits that it brings into the work environment. To begin, I belive precarious labour opens up a new dimension in fostering creativity and innovation which runs today's society. I think this belief that this precarious nature of work is expected from our generation stems from cultural influences from big tech companies such as Google, or Facebook. Their whole culture stems with the idea that ideas are important, and thus, create a free flowing work environment to cultivate on making creative products notably, the 80-20% from Google. 80% of your work is strictly about work given by Google, while the 20% is time for youself to dedicate to your side projects.
It is this notion of investing in indivudal passion that fueled this precarious nature of work. And I believe that this will help provide a catalyst for amazing innovations because of the investment from it's creator. However, I have heard though, unconfirmed, that these side projects are ultimately Google's and therefore, it is absorbed into their ecosystem. With the success of Google's 80-20 rule, i I believe that indivduals value less of their job secruity, but rather more emphasis on making a product/service that they are passionate about. Therefore, I feel that to answer your second question, is that individuals will ignore this notion creative exploitation because, they value the resoruces provided to them to invest in their passion.
Hi Maya,
ReplyDeleteI liked how you connected the idea of the projective city to precarious labour. I think it is extremely important to analyze how the projective city can bring forth issues such as an increase in precarious labour. Most work within the creative industries involves precarious labour, which most likely involves short contracts, temporary work and irregular hours. While creativity and innovation within the workplace has many positive aspects, the precarious nature of the work can be unstable and unpredictable in terms of pay and employment.
To answer your question, while precarious work has both advantages and disadvantages, I believe the shift to a predominately precarious work culture should not be accepted as the new norm. Innovation is something that is strived for as implements creative solutions that are beneficial to society, however, I believe that the shift to precarious labour can create larger issues within society such as a rise in unemployment and workplace exploitation.
Hi Maya,
ReplyDeleteLike Nila, I too think a shift towards a predominantly precarious work culture should not be accepted as the new norm. One of the more attractive aspects of creative or cultural labour is the amount of autonomy granted to individuals; how and when they choose to work. Yet what's dangerous about this 'illusion' of work, is the fact that it can be extremely exploitative at times. Sure, creative workers have the right to work when and how they want to, but they also have the right to starve.The same labour laws that apply to full-time, permanent workers who inhabit both the public and private spheres, does not apply to cultural workers who work either as freelancers, gig workers, temp, etc. There is no guarantee that cultural workers will always have a steady stream of work available to them, as many creative sectors experience 'seasons' of work; a type of 'feast or famine' cycle of opportunity.
It's articles like these (https://www.forbes.com/sites/adp/2017/12/07/workplace-flexibility-for-millennials-appealing-to-a-valuable-new-generation/#7fc630707fe6) that I find truly bizarre; articles that reinforce this belief that new generations of workers want to scrap the old system. I think there are better ways of enacting autonomy in the work place that don't involve restructuring the entire system of employment. Autonomy doesn't have to directly relate to having complete control over your job. How you treat people, talk to clients, how you get your work done, are all ways in which one can employ autonomy without blowing up the system.
Hi Maya,
ReplyDeleteAfter reading your post, I feel you have an interesting question. To answer your question, I think the precarious nature of work contains both advantages and disadvantages. Contract job can waste a good talent, while precarious job can make an ordinary person become a talent. Here, stable means a lack of flow. Even if you are excellent, if there is no pit of time, you can only wait. However, when you wait for ten years, you are no longer excellent. In addition, contract jobs do the work repeat back and forth. This kind of work is hard to have rich knowledge, and much less for the ability to get rapid improvement. On the other hand, precarious work faces a challenge every day. If they do not work hard one day, they may need to find work the next day. All in all, precarious means great mobility, evolution, and you have to challenge yourself every day. Contract work a matter of coping, because the results of your efforts and the results of not working do not have too much difference. Overall, I really enjoy reading it.