Document généré le 24 sept. 2021 21:43 Labour / Le Travail Reviews / Comptes Rendus Volume 62, automne 2008 URI : https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/llt62rv01 Aller au sommaire du numéro Éditeur(s) ISSN 0700-3862 (imprimé) 1911-4842 (numérique) Découvrir la revue Citer ce compte rendu (2008). Compte rendu de [Reviews / Comptes Rendus]. Labour / Le Travail, 62, 235–315. Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d’auteur. L’utilisation des services d’Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d’utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne. https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politique-dutilisation/ Cet article est diffusé et préservé par Érudit. Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l’Université de Montréal, l’Université Laval et l’Université du Québec à Montréal. Il a pour mission la promotion et la valorisation de la recherche. https://www.erudit.org/fr/ REVIEWS / COMPTES RENDUS Robert B. Kristofferson, Craft ket for manufactured goods limited the Capitalism: Craftsworkers and Early extent to which capital could be profit- Industrialization in Hamilton, 1840–1870 ably invested. Relying heavily, but not (Toronto: University of Toronto Press exclusively, on the 1871 manuscript cen- 2007) sus, Kristofferson argues that smaller concerns remained viable, achieved In Craft Capitalism, Robert Kristof- greater productivity in industries where ferson offers a revisionist perspective on new technologies had not displaced craft the effects of early industrialization on production, and presented a “continued craftsworkers. Using Hamilton, Ontario, expansion of self-employment opportu- from 1840 to 1872 as a case study, he nities.” (57) By the 1870s roughly 85 to 95 contends that the combined and uneven per cent of Hamilton’s manufacturers, a nature of early industrialization presented proportion varying only slightly with the artisans with significant opportunities size of their operations, had risen to that for employment and self-employment. status from artisanal origins. The viabil- In their “transmodal position,” between ity of small concerns and the manufac- older craft production and emergent turers’ humble origins lead Kristofferson factory production, craftsworkers con- to conclude that “many, if not most, wage- structed “modes of understanding and earning craftsworkers still maintained experience influenced by capitalism but the hope, perhaps even the expectation, not fully of it or completely determined that they would one day move into mas- by its logic.” (242) Craftsworkers, argues tership or some other craft-based form of Kristofferson, were not dispossessed by independence.” (108) the early 1870s; nor did the Nine-Hours In the second half of the book, the Movement of 1872 express a new work- author argues that the background of ing-class consciousness rooted in their masters, their close shop-floor contact artisanal culture, as Gregory Kealey with and mentoring of their employees, and Bryan Palmer, among others, have and the ambitions of journeymen for argued. Instead, that movement consti- self-employment inspired a culture of tuted a generational, rather than class “master-man mutualism.” That culture debate within “mutualism” – that is, the combined residual elements, derived commonality of interests and aspirations from traditional craft relations, with accepted by masters and journeymen. emergent elements, inspired by mid- The first half of Craft Capitalism nineteenth-century industrial progress. explores the economic and social struc- As they had traditionally done, masters tures associated with early industrializa- and journeymen celebrated their “com- tion. Not unlike the conditions in many mon craft world” (120) at picnics, testi- other centres at the time, the limited monials, and parades, and even union and variable demand in Hamilton’s mar- events drew participation from employ- Table of Contents for Reviews pp. 5–6. 236 / LABOUR /LE TRAVAIL 62 ers. Manufacturers proudly emphasized, capitalism did stimulate workers’ class and were complimented upon, their self- awareness. More than that, however, his made success and continuing practical appreciation of the cultural significance craft knowledge. The public affirmation of self-employment warrants serious con- of the self-made business success pos- sideration, especially as presented in one sible during early industrialization was of the country’s major industrial cities. In just one theme in a broader new culture particular, the analysis of the discourse of self-improvement. Craftsworkers more on self-made success and self-improve- generally pursued self-improvement in ment does reveal the public context of practical skill, intellectual knowledge, personal ambitions. Still, there remains and moral responsibility as the founda- much that is overstated or uncritical in tion for a masculine independence. this study and much more that we would That the emergent cultural elements like to know about the social organiza- did not always rest easily with the resid- tion of early industrial capitalism. ual, Kristofferson maintains, was evident First, Kristofferson is probably cor- in the Nine-Hours Movement strike of rect in his contention that the status of 1872. Rather than the struggle of alien- master was a hope for many journeymen ated workers against exploiting employ- and attracted many British immigrants ers, the strike revealed that “what some to places, like Hamilton, where they masters and men considered the norms believed they could achieve a condition in of their mutualistic culture were diverg- life they saw passing at home. His proof ing.” (235) Disagreement developed not for that, however, is more inferential than over the broad objectives of the move- evidential. Rather than critically examin- ment in wanting self-improvement, but ing the immigration literature or diaries rather over the drastic means that a and correspondence of men following minority of craftsworkers took to achieve that ambition, or trying to calculate the that goal. The difference was generational probabilities of samples of artisans actu- and not one of class: an older genera- ally attaining that status, his conclusion tion, which understood its success as the rests mainly on the detailed investigation result of hard work, had little sympathy of the backgrounds of 233 industrialists for a younger generation’s impatience and listed in the 1871 manuscript census. unwillingness to follow the tried and true Their origins are taken as confirmation of way. Younger craftsworkers demanded the value and the reality of craft mobil- shorter hours as their right, which, they ity. That some might never have been felt, was justified by their contributions to able to secure master status or failed in modern industry and necessary for their their attempt is of little consequence for self-improvement as citizens in a “mod- Kristofferson, since “it is likely that the ern liberal economy and society.” (207) example of most large industrial employ- In the end, however, “the quick death” ers in the city having made the successful (217) of the movement demonstrated the transition from journeyman-for-some- lack of depth of real differences between one-else to master-of-their-own some- masters and men and the strength of what clouded this reality.” (89) “Likely” mutualism. and “somewhat” are two slippery qualifi- In one sense, Kristofferson’s argument ers for a lack of evidence. Regrettably, the is about timing, since he does concede success of some does not prove the aspi- that later, probably in the aftermath of rations or more importantly the accom- the depression of 1878 and certainly plishments of others. Indeed, one might by the 1890s, the alienating effects of argue that the success of some reduced REVIEWS / COMPTES RENDUS / 237 the chances for others, since opportuni- erty of a certain value, not all men could ties once open had become filled. vote until 1885, and even their right to Second, we do need to explore more petition was clouded by the reservations deeply the culture of “mutualism” in of the propertied about their limited mid-nineteenth-century society. Masters stake in the community. Yet, involved in and journeymen did assume reciprocal politics they were and journeymen filled dependence and obligations with one the crowds, and mobs, of election cam- another. However, even though the social paigns. We need to know more about the difference between the two could be con- political relationships between masters ceived partly as one of age, an employ- and journeymen and also to reinterpret ment relationship did bind the two the claims to rights and citizenship, as in together. Cultural values, social practices, the Nine-Hours Movement, of men who and non-monetary economic responsi- did not fully possess them. bilities may have qualified the master’s Fourth, Craft Capitalism presents power more – or, differently – than that mutuality only within its workplace of the capitalist employer, for whom the context. Voluntarism, whether in fire wage-labour contract simplified the com- brigades or the militia, filled another mitments made in employment. But the dimension of the craftsworkers’ non- master remained master and hired work- work lives and often engaged the prop- ers within the law of master and servant ertyless in the protection of the property – a concept unacknowledged in Craft of others. The responsibility to help one’s Capitalism (The author frequently terms fellow was rooted in a range of organiza- the relationship as