“Work is of two kinds: first, altering the position of matter at or near the earth’s surface relative to other such matter; second, telling other people to do so. The first kind is unpleasant and ill paid; the second is pleasant and highly paid.”
-Bertrand Russell

I do not know anyone who belongs to the class of the idle rich—those who do not need to work and can spend their days doing whatever they wish. My friends, even those who are pretty decently paid, still get up early and tuck into their tasks. There are bills to pay and, as Ringo Starr sang, you know it don’t come easy.

I like descriptions of work: putting your shoulder to the stone, laboring in the vineyards, working the coal face, being in the saddle, being yoked into harness, walking behind the plow, feeling sweat on one’s brow, and many others. For better or worse, the amount of work to do never seems to run out.

I don’t mean to sound silly though when I mourn that the opposite of work, being idle, has for way too long been the unfair and undeserved target of barbs, slights, and condemnations. I say we should give idleness a second chance.

This beloved topic of mine, taking one’s ease, has actually been addressed by truly first-rate writers and thinkers. Among the most famous is Bertrand Russell in his masterful 1932 apologia entitled In Praise of Idleness. This gem, in case you have not yet had the pleasure, is worth fifteen minutes: In Praise of Idleness Russell is so persuasive that I have yet to find even a half-way decent rebuttal of his thoughts.

The granddaddy of the inactivity genre however, is Dr. Samuel Johnson who, from 1758 to 1760, published 91 of The Idler essays that appeared in the London weekly The Universal Chronicle. Although I am still working through them, those that I have read are treasures of satire, humor, and a quixotic meditation on life in general. Regrettably we don’t find writing like this today as Johnson was a true smorgasbord of exquisite wit.

A more modern, but equally tongue-in-cheek, approach to the topic comes from the Englishman Tom Hodgkinson who penned his thoughts in a 2007 book entitled How to be Idle – A Loafer’s Guide. Here Hodgkinson encourages us to quit trying to be active every moment and instead emulate the French flaneur—a man who has perfected the art of being out strolling while shedding all appearances of haste and striving.

Each of the short 24 chapters, one for every hour of the day, describes how we can better savor our time. Tom certainly earns his “idle chops” in this mini-masterpiece as an advocate for a slower life.

Today we need these three heavyweights Russell, Johnson, and Hodgkinson, fighting on behalf of idleness. Why? Because the opponent is a fearsome bruiser in the form of the over-achiever crowd who wring the last drop of efficiency and productivity from everything in life.

These virulent enemies of inactivity include moralistic crusaders as far back as Seneca, the authors of the Biblical book of Proverbs, the Puritans, and endless others. They poke and prod, admonish and condemn, and then level the severest judgment against any sign of slowness on the assembly line of life. Here we find Seneca with good words but taking things way too seriously: Seneca

I remember running across Proverbs 6:6 early in life: “Go to the ant you sluggard; consider its ways and be wise!“

Sluggard? What’s up with the demeaning tone? Not sure other than to say that in my case it fell on decidedly deaf ears as I never have had the desire to put in the grueling office hours that an ant apparently does.

To be clear, none of the triumvirate of idleness thinkers I admire were slouches. Bertrand Russell is one of history’s towering intellects. Samuel Johnson’s staggering writing output has earned him the reputation as perhaps the finest man of English letters—unequaled even to today. Tom Hodgkinson prepped at the famous Winchester school in London and went on to earn a degree from Cambridge. Sidenote: Apart from his many serious pursuits, he also started the National Unawareness day and published a work on playing the ukulele.

These greats defined the crucial role idleness should play in our lives. None of them advocate a stupor of unadulterated sloth in which we sit, bovine like, on the sofa and stare at a screen for hours. Instead, they argue for the exact opposite—thinking, reflecting, and enjoying the subtler aspects of life. They know that idleness is the best means to unfold our minds so that, counterintuitively, we can do our best thinking. Ever notice how our best thoughts come to us when we are the most relaxed—taking a walk or simply having a chat with a friend? Of course!  Shouldn’t that tell us something?

Yet idleness is under renewed attack and the self-help gurus are earning even more money than they usually do with their perky precepts and pithy platitudes as to how we should arrange our lives.

Yes, they admit that we all need downtime. Very few can go 100% for weeks on end and those who even try are statistically so far from the mean as to be, well, meaningless to us. We need time to refresh, recharge, rejuvenate, and reenergize in order to reengage. (Btw…there are even more “re” words I like such as restock, reload, reinvigorate, etc. but I thought you were getting the picture…)

But now the achievement gurus have taken it a step too far. They are treating rejuvinating as if it were an assault on Mr. Everest and wish to craft specific and exacting rest strategies so as to maximize every down moment in the service of more productivity and to be a step closer to our self-actualization goals. Seriously…

They have openly expropriated the pristine concept of idleness and stripped it of its true meaning so it can be just another productivity tool. Frankly, I find this crude and crass. Idleness, as described and practiced by the greats, is not a mere tool but an integral part of life. Now the efficiency eager beavers are turning idleness into something akin to “mandatory fun” so that we can do what? Yep, that’s right—tackle more work! This is so bad that it is, as the Nobel physicist Wolfgang Pauli once said, not even good enough to be wrong!

How then can we defend the honor of idleness? To start we should make clear that idleness is not the equivalent of pure sloth. We who take pride in a job well done will continue to fulfill our duties, but we need to recognize that by failing to protect idleness we hurt ourselves for over-achievers will simply use our good graces against us by demanding more and more from everyone around them.

So the obvious exceptions of when we are at work, we should practice idleness as often  as we can by disengaging a little bit each day with no goal in mind. Not as escapism mind you but, and not to sound too New-Age here, to rediscover that joy of life that we had when we were young. Remember, it is we who changed as we aged while the wonders of life have remained firmly where they have always been—woven into the fabric of the world around us.

Last, we need to stop viewing every single blasted thing in life as if we can chop, slice, and dice it into component parts just so we can be the master of them. Sure, tackle life with gusto, but trying to be king of all that we surveil is a hamster-wheel mindset that robs us of the gifts that idleness bequeaths to us.

If you are not accustomed to inactivity then might I suggest you heed the words of Samuel Johnson as he advised us in The Idler to work (pun intended!) into idleness a little bit each day. I followed this advice very early in life and am pleased to report that it was one of life’s great hacks.

What ho!