Working with pottery places the notion of labor in a new light. What is the antonym of “labor”? Hint: It’s not “leisure.” “Consumption” is closer. But the most-accurate choice would seem to be “production.”
Starting from the other end of the spectrum, our natural choice of an antonym for “production” would be “consumption.” Labor consumes time, however, and thus occupies, in that sense, a position opposite of “ production.”
A discussion of labor inevitably entails a consideration of what constitutes a reasonable amount of work and what constitutes excessive labor, or “overwork.” The latter is labor in excess of what we regard as reasonable for the desired compensation. Conversely, a commitment of effort less than what we regard as reasonable is “laziness.” If an employee—the “laborer”—and a third-party observer share a perception of overwork, an action against the employer might ensue. And if the employee is alone in that perception, he or she might be subject to disciplining or even dismissal.
Inseparable from the question of labor in the realm of pottery is the question of what is being produced. Pottery spans a combination of “necessities” and “luxuries.” Necessities include utilitarian items for daily usage, such as cups and bowls. Luxuries, n the other hand, include items for artistic display, such as ceramic objets d’art, and for aesthetic diversions, such as works for the tea ceremony.
People can disagree, of course, about where to draw the line between necessities and luxuries. Indeed, the same item—say, a sublime chawan (tea bowl)—might be a luxury at the hands of one owner and a necessity at the hands of an owner. A chawan used but once or twice a year for tea ceremony gatherings strikes us as a luxury item. Yet we perceive a utilitarian necessity in the same chawan if it is used for the owner’s daily tea. The distinction between necessities and luxuries is thus relative, but it is nonetheless one that most of us acknowledge to be real.
Producers of pottery likely to be regarded as luxury items sometimes emphasize the time-consuming requirements of the production. Some of them suggest that those requirements warrant charging more for the work. The potters are thus likening their labor to that of employees who put in overtime.
Choosing to undertake the production of time-consuming items is, however, a decision that the potters make freely. The potters presumably make that decision because they enjoy making the items in question. We could therefore suggest, tongue only lightly in cheek, that the potters should lower, rather than raise, the prices for such work.
On a more serious note, we perceive a disturbing trend among potters prone to droning on about their time-consuming work: their output exhibits a gradual deterioration in vibrancy. The opposite is true of potters who exalt in the joy of creating the work of their choice: their output displays a mounting joie de vivre over time and, more often than not, a growing proficiency. They recognize that the compensation for real work is the work itself, and they approach their craft in that spirit. Customers, meanwhile, are more than happy to take part in the process of creation through pecuniary expressions of support.
