Women in The Help might find autotelic motivation in witnessing (and nurturing) the growth and development of their charges. Childcare can often be quite gratifying. Similarly, the Mill Girls, on occasion, might find gratification (and take pride in) the quality or quantity of cloth they produce. Perhaps the Harvey Girls similarly take some pride in the service they provide. In other words, there might be some Autotelia in these women’s world and in the work being done by each population we studied. However, there certainly isn’t much leisure time in their life. Furthermore, the autotelic high they might experience comes from work that is not necessarily of their choosing.
The Nature and Dynamics of Postmodern Capitalism
As just noted regarding work and nonwork time (and earlier regarding the Line), boundaries being forged in a capitalistic society are important. These boundaries concern social class Lines, as well as work and non-work. They are also concerned with the observation (and regulation) of both one’s personal life and one’s work life. There is a bottom line that is social rather than economic: it is a shattering of traditional boundaries regarding privacy in both the work life and personal life of those employed by organizations in a postmodern capitalist society.
This social bottom line relates directly to the financial bottom line. As noted by Ralph Estes, traditional modes of accountability require careful monitoring of work performance. Furthermore, even though reputation and public relations are intangible assets, the executives in modern organizations know that the behavior of their employees (even off the job) impacts how their organization is viewed by external stakeholders (such as members of the local community). Mill owners and the Harvey organization imposed parietal regulations on their employees. Nothing is free from observation and regulation in the life of the women we are studying. An observational culture is in full force.
The observational culture
This shattering of boundaries seems to be pervasive in contemporary postmodern societies (Zuboff, 2020). Extensive information about buying habits, financial status, and related matters is assembled. Privacy is broken so that organizations can improve their marketing. Ultimately, this means centralized control over (or at least strong influence regarding) individual decision-making behavior. We see this every day when visiting the Internet. “It” knows what interests us and what we want to buy. Organizations throughout the world have more information about us than was the case when we lived in small communities or urban ethnic ghettos. The Internet knows more about our behavior and interests than our neighbors ever did when we lived in small, intimate communities. Even other family members might not be aware of all our “hidden” interests and aspirations.
In many ways, the observational culture is not a new phenomenon. We didn’t need the Internet or the creation of a monitored search algorithm to produce this culture. We find that pervasive observation and its close alignment with modern capitalism can be traced back to practices of observation and control that are found in 19th-century industry, as well as 19th-century prisons, educational institutions, and even facilities for treatment of the mentally ill (Foucault, 1977; Foucault, 1988). Locus of control resides at the heart of the matter. Pervasive observation leads to internalization of previously external control, especially when we have no access to the observation ourselves. We don’t know if we are being observed. And we can’t observe those who are observing us. There is no two-way observation. It is only a one-way mirror.
