Research paper: Machine at the cost of Human

The debate of replacement of working force and human manual work has been a contested issue since the beginning of industrial revolution. The history of human civilization articulates that 18th Century witnessed the emergence of diverse aspects of life in Britain, because during this period, not only growth of population but expansion of foreign trade also took place. As a result, manufacturing of goods and services were demanded underbrought a drastic change in the way of manufacture. However, before this transition, Human used to dwell in small areas where their main source of livelihood was farming. Human worked averagely with low income and most of the productions recentered at domestic level or in a small rural village area.

Starting from England, the industrial revolution spread to neighboring countries like France, Germany. Before this revolution, manual working culture for agriculture and textile Wasim tradition. This replacement of human being through the mechanization exerted enormous impact and showed a possible advent life in a human being and broad machine age. Whether it was coal or iron industry or Textile industry, everywhere technology made the production faster considering the consumption and time frame where industry was regulated through a channel. Industrial revolution of 18th Century can be understood as first phase of revolution. Twentieth century entered another revolution, where center of attention was electricity, petroleum and steel. A rapid growth in production was achieved, and it could be possible despite the evolvement of railways and telegraph, where ideas of people came in contact. Obviously human society acquired an achievement from these revolutions that connected people and place globally.

On the contrary, the production and technological advancement on the cost of human being can’t be denied today and how human life was affected after this industrial revolution cannot be overlooked. One of the great Austrian writers and dramatist from post war era, named Thomas Bernhard explained this through a German short story, “Eine Machine”. The text deals with the human being and machine. There are three major events, which is being described in his writing: The arrival and installation of machine, death of the worker and the packing of her head. The text begins with the function of machine, which cuts the mass of rubber in small pieces and let them to fall on conveyor belt. The women workers sit on conveyor belt and pack the rubber pieces falling on the belt. The text describes how the engineers and proprietors celebrate the inauguration of the machine in the factory. There is a “solemn ceremony” where all take off their hats to show respect to the machine. There are speeches and orchestra. A worker slips while oiling the machine and the machine cuts her head just like it cuts the mass of rubber. What makes a conscious mind to think is not her death but the fact that none of the workers raise an alarm. They pack the dead girl’s head in a cartoon box in “the usual way” like any other product. Several motifs like monotony of the habit or the role of the machine are exposed in the story.

The nature of conveyor-belt work is highlighted in this story. The workers themselves behave as like program device of machines because of the mechanical nature and ignoring human value to meet the target of production and company. This monotony distances them from the human world. Their senses become insensitive. Creativity became limited to human mechanical behavior. The hallmark of their world is “repetition”. When the accident occurs, the workers are unable to react like human beings and they “simply” pack the head in the carton like they do whole day, day after day.

The patriarchal society is also emphasized in the text. The proprietors and engineers, both represent this dominating patriarchal society. The engineers instruct the female workers, how to use the machine and how to oil it regularly. The women are showed as workers, who are not part of the management. These female workers are controlled by them. They are obedient and passive. It is the female worker who becomes the victim of the dangerous machine. The fascination with machines is another aspect of this small but powerful narrative. The Machine is described as “one of the greatest technological triumphs”. The narrative can be understood a satire on what is generally described as Progress. The Machine is symbolically called by the author Guillotine, an obvious reminder of the terror of the French Revolution. Ironically, the guillotine was used in the French Revolution to kill the members of French aristocracy. In this narrative it kills a young female worker. It is time to rethink that any technological advancement can’t surpass the sophisticated skill values of human life society has to be conscious in utilization of scientific ideas and nurture the human value equally, which later, can truly bring the sustainable growth in equilibrium.

Bibliography

1. Bernhard, Thomas: Eernisse, Frankfurt am Main:

Suhrkamp, 1991

2. Mehnert, Alexander: Entwicklung der Arbeitsformen in der Arbeit Wissenschaft

und hire Auswirkungen auf die Beschäftigten,

München: Grin Verlag, 2011

3. Bekes, Peter, Thomas Bernhard. Text +Kritik, München: Karl

Theimeg Verlag, 1980

4. Griffin, Emma: A Short History of the British Industrial Revolution,

London, Palgrave Macmillan Publisher Limited, 2010

-Bikram Kumar

D.U.

Newer Post Older Post