4 ms·

Could you talk more about this? I mean, I don't think it makes one an aristocrat to be an independently motivated person who isn't living hand to mouth. But wha

by jart 4y ago

Could you talk more about this? I mean, I don't think it makes one an aristocrat to be an independently motivated person who isn't living hand to mouth. But what do you think allowed more people to focus on unfettered hobbies in the past, and why would you say are fewer people able to do that today?

rjsw 4y ago
The point about being independently wealthy is that you don't have to work at all, you can spend every waking minute on your "hobby".
- jart 4y ago
  Yes but you don't have to be wealthy to not work. 42% of Americans aren't employed. Would you say they're all aristocrats? You don't even necessarily need a family member to support you either, if you're willing to couchsurf, backpack, and be creative in how you acquire food. Lifestyle anarchists do that for instance, so they can move out and focus on their passions.
  - gjm11 4y ago
    I think most not-employed people fall into categories like these: - People too young to be in employment. - People too old to be in employment. - People with illnesses or disabilities that make employment difficult or impossible. - People who don't have skills that anyone wants to pay them for. These people are not aristocrats, for sure, but most of them will not be highly effective working for love as opposed to working for money. Also, being poor can be exhausting. Someone who isn't employed and isn't an aristocrat is likely to have a lot of their mental energy taken up with surviving, which again is likely to make them less able to do wonderful things working for love. Important note: of course all the above is "most", "likely", etc.; there will be exceptions. Some school-age people are geniuses. Some retired people still have plenty of energy and focus. Some people have illnesses or disabilities that make ordinary jobs impossible but can still do great things if they can do the work on their own time and on their own terms. Some people have skills that others would pay them for if the others had any sense but for whatever reason don't sell themselves well. Etc., etc., etc. But, proportionally, there are going to be fewer people suited to create great things while not employed among that 42% than among the aristocrats of an earlier age. (Or of this age.) Another important note: Of course the starving artist or writer is something of a cliche, so it was never all aristocrats who were creating great things outside the constraints of paid employment.
    - atq2119 4y ago
      Don't forget: - People who are doing unpaid care work (e.g. for children, or sick relatives)
      - gjm11 4y ago
        Yup, very much also a thing, and very much also an obstacle to doing a lot of other work at the same time.
ly3xqhl8g9 4y ago
I believe they think about persons such as Tycho Brahe, William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin, street-named Lord Kelvin, or even John von Neumann, whose father, Neumann Miksa, received the "von" from emperor Franz Joseph. There is a difference between being given an island by the king to build your own astronomical observatory in the 1600s [1] and knowing that you don't have to worry about food and shelter for the next few years because of your well-placed long-term investments. In this sense, the very few amateurs left today are the billionaires funding their own space agencies and whatever else they fancy. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tycho_Brahe#:~:text=King%20Frederick%20II%20granted%20Tycho%20an%20estate%20on%20the%20island%20of%20Hven https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tycho_Brahe#:~:text=King%20Fre...
- WJW 4y ago
  It's not really the same, since it's not the billionaires designing or building the rockets. They hire professionals for that.
  - ly3xqhl8g9 4y ago
    Yes, not the same, Tycho Brahe, estimated to own 1% of the entire wealth of Denmark at the time, treated his workers as slaves [1], and even owned a slave as jester [2]. Today we have wages. [1] "Gellius appears to have feared that Tycho wanted to keep him on Hven 'working like a slave.'", 1991, Victor E. Thoren, The Lord of Uraniborg. A Biography of Tycho Brahe, Cambridge University Press, p. 357 [2] ibid., p. 193
- uwagar 4y ago
  amateurs dont have to do big things (perhaps big things impress you/us). anything can be picked up and polished to perfection. see dodorango
- einpoklum 4y ago
  > In this sense, the very few amateurs left today are the billionaires funding their own space agencies and whatever else they fancy. This is probably true if your amateur project is building a rocket to go to Mars, but not true for the vast majority of independently-pursued projects of art, craft, design and engineering.
cycomanic 4y ago
So one example (which is fairly recent) is the split between rugby union and Rugby league (two codes of rugby, playing by slightly different rules). Rugby was initially played at the "public" schools (which are in fact private) in the UK, where supposedly rugby originated. As it became more popular clubs from working class cities started playing rugby as well. Because working class men (in contrast to the rich men at private schools) could not afford to spend time playing rugby instead of working, the clubs started paying their players. As these working class clubs started to become increasingly successful, the governing rugby body which was dominated by the private schools insisted that players are amateurs. The conflict escalated to the working class clubs splitting of to form a different code of rugby (rugby league). The classism behind the split is still causes animosity behind the different supporters in the UK (it is less so in e.g. NZ were rugby was never a rich kids sport). You can read more here https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/sport/2019/10/split-between-rugby-league-and-rugby-union-story-national-class-division https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/sport/2019/10/split-bet...

by jart 4y ago

rjsw 4y ago

The point about being independently wealthy is that you don't have to work at all, you can spend every waking minute on your "hobby".

jart 4y ago
Yes but you don't have to be wealthy to not work. 42% of Americans aren't employed. Would you say they're all aristocrats? You don't even necessarily need a family member to support you either, if you're willing to couchsurf, backpack, and be creative in how you acquire food. Lifestyle anarchists do that for instance, so they can move out and focus on their passions.
- gjm11 4y ago
  I think most not-employed people fall into categories like these: - People too young to be in employment. - People too old to be in employment. - People with illnesses or disabilities that make employment difficult or impossible. - People who don't have skills that anyone wants to pay them for. These people are not aristocrats, for sure, but most of them will not be highly effective working for love as opposed to working for money. Also, being poor can be exhausting. Someone who isn't employed and isn't an aristocrat is likely to have a lot of their mental energy taken up with surviving, which again is likely to make them less able to do wonderful things working for love. Important note: of course all the above is "most", "likely", etc.; there will be exceptions. Some school-age people are geniuses. Some retired people still have plenty of energy and focus. Some people have illnesses or disabilities that make ordinary jobs impossible but can still do great things if they can do the work on their own time and on their own terms. Some people have skills that others would pay them for if the others had any sense but for whatever reason don't sell themselves well. Etc., etc., etc. But, proportionally, there are going to be fewer people suited to create great things while not employed among that 42% than among the aristocrats of an earlier age. (Or of this age.) Another important note: Of course the starving artist or writer is something of a cliche, so it was never all aristocrats who were creating great things outside the constraints of paid employment.
  - atq2119 4y ago
    Don't forget: - People who are doing unpaid care work (e.g. for children, or sick relatives)
    - gjm11 4y ago
      Yup, very much also a thing, and very much also an obstacle to doing a lot of other work at the same time.

ly3xqhl8g9 4y ago

I believe they think about persons such as Tycho Brahe, William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin, street-named Lord Kelvin, or even John von Neumann, whose father, Neumann Miksa, received the "von" from emperor Franz Joseph. There is a difference between being given an island by the king to build your own astronomical observatory in the 1600s [1] and knowing that you don't have to worry about food and shelter for the next few years because of your well-placed long-term investments. In this sense, the very few amateurs left today are the billionaires funding their own space agencies and whatever else they fancy. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tycho_Brahe#:~:text=King%20Frederick%20II%20granted%20Tycho%20an%20estate%20on%20the%20island%20of%20Hven https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tycho_Brahe#:~:text=King%20Fre...

WJW 4y ago
It's not really the same, since it's not the billionaires designing or building the rockets. They hire professionals for that.
- ly3xqhl8g9 4y ago
  Yes, not the same, Tycho Brahe, estimated to own 1% of the entire wealth of Denmark at the time, treated his workers as slaves [1], and even owned a slave as jester [2]. Today we have wages. [1] "Gellius appears to have feared that Tycho wanted to keep him on Hven 'working like a slave.'", 1991, Victor E. Thoren, The Lord of Uraniborg. A Biography of Tycho Brahe, Cambridge University Press, p. 357 [2] ibid., p. 193
uwagar 4y ago
amateurs dont have to do big things (perhaps big things impress you/us). anything can be picked up and polished to perfection. see dodorango
einpoklum 4y ago
> In this sense, the very few amateurs left today are the billionaires funding their own space agencies and whatever else they fancy. This is probably true if your amateur project is building a rocket to go to Mars, but not true for the vast majority of independently-pursued projects of art, craft, design and engineering.

cycomanic 4y ago

So one example (which is fairly recent) is the split between rugby union and Rugby league (two codes of rugby, playing by slightly different rules). Rugby was initially played at the "public" schools (which are in fact private) in the UK, where supposedly rugby originated. As it became more popular clubs from working class cities started playing rugby as well. Because working class men (in contrast to the rich men at private schools) could not afford to spend time playing rugby instead of working, the clubs started paying their players. As these working class clubs started to become increasingly successful, the governing rugby body which was dominated by the private schools insisted that players are amateurs. The conflict escalated to the working class clubs splitting of to form a different code of rugby (rugby league). The classism behind the split is still causes animosity behind the different supporters in the UK (it is less so in e.g. NZ were rugby was never a rich kids sport). You can read more here https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/sport/2019/10/split-between-rugby-league-and-rugby-union-story-national-class-division https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/sport/2019/10/split-bet...