Define "work"

[lillibet]

Elsewhere, someone was discussing the work that he and his partner are doing to improve/sustain their relationship and someone else commented that if a relationship requires work, then it may not be worth continuing. This led into a discussion of what defines "work," more generally. If you enjoy a process, is it work? If you choose to do something, is it work? Are activities you undertake in pursuit of a hobby work? If you get paid to do something, is that work? If the product of your activity mainly benefits someone else, is that work? What activities do not count as work? What is work?

EDIT: For those of you who enjoy conversations between dpolicar and me as a spectator sport, be sure to check out the comments.

Comments

[dpolicar]

I'd say it's "work" if you're doing it because you want the results, rather than because you want the experience of doing it.

That said, sometimes what one wants is the experience of doing work, which would make a hash of my formulation. But I still think I have the right basic idea.

BTW, I'm inclined to disagree with the idea that a relationship that requires work isn't worth continuing. I know, you're shocked.

[lordfeepness.livejournal.com]

I don't think that "work" necessarily has to have a negative connotation. I think that you can absolutely have fun while doing work--or, on the other hand, some kinds of work may cause boredom, pain, etc. I think I would define work as any activity you engage in in order to realize, or contribute to the realization of, a finished product of some kind. In other words, it's a goal-oriented activity, as opposed to a free-form activity with no specifically defined end result.

[skreeky]

if a relationship requires work, then it may not be worth continuing

Good gods, what a preposterous idea! I wonder if this person has any relationships worth saving at all, and whether the other person involved would agree.

[kerri9494.livejournal.com]

'Work' is expending effort. I think it's value neutral, really...it's not a bad/hard thing in and of itself.

Running a marathon is 'work'. To some people, it's liberating and exciting, and to others it's painful and awful.

To maintain a good relationship, then, there HAS to be 'work'...or 'effort', right? I mean, otherwise, you're just coexisting. Getting up to get someone a ginger ale is 'work'. (Heck, getting up to get yourself one is 'work', too, but I assume we're considering *extra* 'work'.)

If it's hard work, odious work, work that makes you feel bad rather than feeling good, then that's an indicator that something is wrong. Or if you're the kind of person who's so selfish that any 'work' you do for someone other than yourself is to be suffered through, then perhaps you're just not the relationship type. :-)

So yes. A relationship is 'work'. It means doing things you might not otherwise do, or not doing things you would. And those changes/transitions are 'work'. Remembering flowers on her birthday is 'work'. It's the motivations behind that (I want to, v. I have to) which make it 'good work' or 'bad work'.

I think.

[mangosteen]

I assert that any sufficiently complex and close relationship needs active effort in order to continue and thrive. This may or may not coincide with some other definition of "work". Only weeds grow naturally.

[marmota.livejournal.com]

if a relationship requires work, then it may not be worth continuing.

I agree; either there is something very semantically interesting going on in this person's mind, or something is horribly wrong.

[hammercock.livejournal.com]

I think all relationships require occasional maintenance effort, but the degree may vary over relationships and over time within the same relationship. As for the "not worth continuing" comment, I would assert that if a relationship either gets no maintenance work or is in constant maintenance mode, that's the time to start reassessing whether it's worth continuing. No work can mean stagnation and complacency, but too much work can mean that the relationship just isn't viable in the long-term.

I think relationship "work" can be enjoyable and can be chosen, but may not be either of those from time to time, and that the degree to which it usually is freely-chosen and enjoyable may well be indicative of how well the relationship will weather the times when it is miserable and forced upon you.

[ceelove.livejournal.com]

I go with the very basic Tom Sawyer whitewashing-the-fence definition: If you have to do it, it's work; if you don't, it isn't. For example, I love doing massage, such that I've gone to some effort to bring my table to the beach, the mountains, the desert, etc, for the sake of giving massage to strangers. But I also perform massage as work, i.e., I show up to give massage for a specific amount of time to a specific person, because that person is paying me to do so. I may well enjoy it very much, but then it's "work."

[heliopsis.livejournal.com]

Force times distance.

[breadd.livejournal.com]

um, reminded me of this joke, for which I googled to find a copy:

http://www.comedy-zone.net/jokes/laugh/religion/religious12.htm

[xthread.livejournal.com]

I still have to read the long exchange twixt you and dpolicar, but for the moment I'm inclined to second the inestimable mangosteen's fine analysis.

[entirelysonja.livejournal.com]

For those of you following along at home, my original words were:

In my own life, I've found that good relationships don't require anything that feels like work. Good relationships certainly require time and attention and communication and all that jazz, but I find that when my partner and I are compatible to begin with, those things require no significant effort.

When we discussed it, my husband phrased it slightly differently, saying that relationships certainly require effort, but in a good relationship, that effort is not onerous.

To answer your question, I think that for me, if there's something else I'd rather be doing, then what I'm currently doing is probably work. Additionally, even when I'm doing what I most want to be doing, it could be work if I'm doing it for the benefit of a person or group other than a close friend or family member.

So if what I most want to be doing is resolving a issue with my partner, then it's not work to me. And since in good relationships, I generally want to resolve issues as quickly as is practical, I don't usually find that conflict resolution feels like work to me.

Whereas if I decide to spend the afternoon doing something enjoyable for an organization I'm involved with, it still feels like work because I'm doing it for the benefit of the organization or the people it serves.

I had originally been going to say that even if there's something I'd rather be doing, what I'm currently doing might not be work if I'm doing it for the benefit of a close friend or family member, but I'm actually not so sure that's true, depending on how I think about "would rather be doing." There are certainly times when I do things that wouldn't originally have been my first choice of how to spend my time, yet I don't wind up feeling that they are work. I think that may be because those things are so clearly the right thing to do, I'm unable to imagine doing anything else with my time at that moment.

Driving to the airport at 5 am is certainly not usually on my list of "things I'd like to be doing," but if a close friend or family member needs to get to the airport early in the morning, I can't think of anything I'd rather be doing than taking them there, and it certainly doesn't feel like work.

[muffyjo]

I'm inclined to equate "work" as a neutral term having multiple meanings all of which engender a change in some state. The state of the object or objects or the state of some aspect of me. Working is a means to an end. Whether or not I enjoy that process depends on my attitude and choices.