The first word from Swift’s poem that I find important is the word “lie”. Strephon feels that the image of Celia as being sweet and cleanly is a lie after snooping through her dressing room. He expresses feelings of betrayal when he discovers that in order to maintain her appearance Celia must take so many disgusting steps. Not only does Strephon’s opinion of Celia fall, but it also appears that his outlook on female beauty in general changes. His newfound discoveries have caused him to place significantly less value on that particular trait.

The second word important word is “raised”. This word is used by the narrator to say that Strephon should marvel at the beauty that rises from filth, representing a contrasting belief from what Strephon is currently experiencing. Rather than being as revolting as their dressing rooms, women are able to escape it and overcome the disadvantages of the normal human body to appear perfect. Having this mentality appears to increase the value of female beauty.

Each of these words describes the same discovery, one expressing disappointment and anger while the other displays respect and understanding. This contrast highlights the very essence of this poem. Establishing value can be an entirely relative process, often leading to disputes of worth. Most of the time, there is no resolution to this discrepancy, and this poem is a great example of that fact. The narrator disagrees with Strephon, and it is highly unlikely that Strephon will completely change his opinion based on what he had just seen.

The division of labor is a corner stone of the economic society in which we live. In Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith talks at great length about how dividing labor greatly increases production and profits, saying that ”the division of labour, however, so far as it can be introduced, occasions, in every art, a proportionable increase of the productive powers of labour.” (Ch. 1) He uses as an example a group of people making pins. Each person is specialized in one part of the production process, ultimately allowing them as a group to produce a much greater amount of the final product than they could ever achieve working alone.

While it is extremely prevalent, Smith identifies that this division of labor is not our natural instinct. Instead, we naturally want to trade goods with other individuals in order to obtain what we want. If I make pins alone, then there is theoretically no limit to who I am capable of trading with. However, if I am only a part of the pin making process, the only person with whom I can trade is whoever is next on the production line. Because that good is so specialized, the audience for it is just as narrow.

For this reason, Karl Marx views the division of labor as a form of slavery to the individual. “For as soon as the distribution of labor comes into being, each man has a particular, exclusive sphere of activity, which is forced upon him and from which he cannot escape (Pg. 160).” Once an individual has become specialized in one trade, they are essentially stuck in that economic role for good.

These two writers are forcing their readers to look at an everyday part of the economy with a different perspective. Despite being written almost 200 years ago, this new perspective is still essential today. Yes, specializing in one trade can often lead to financial success, but is it what we are naturally inclined to do? Is it even what is best for us? Clearly, these two would say that it is not.

• A major role that Julius plays is that he gives the reader a first hand look at how the Bitchun Society views and treats an individual who has almost no Whuffie. This ranges from how people avoid and ignore  him to how he loses his belongings because they can better serve someone with more Whuffie. In my paper, I will connect this to a lot of what Adam Smith wrote about in his Theory of Moral Sentiments and how people view the rich.
• Another key function of Julius’ character plays is that he highlights that in the Bitchun Society that being content and achieving goals is nearly impossible. This comes from Julius always refreshed and reinvented himself at DisneyWorld and that when he finally lives there, it eventually leads him to go crazy. Marx touches on how one of the first historical acts is that the satisfaction of a need creates a new need that eventually must be satisfied.

These are just the first two points that have come to mind when thinking about why Julius exists in Down and Out. As I start to write the paper and continue to analyze, I want to address some issues such as Julius not wanting to refresh from his backup and him losing his network and going offline. Also, I feel that I should try to use more of Marx other than what was hinted at above.

In this sentence, Marx is talking about the acts that are shared by all mankind. The first is procreation with the second being the sentence above. With this statement, Marx is saying that once the first need is satisfied, other needs arise. This idea describes the first moment in which other needs are born, but it implies that this is not the only time this cycle takes place. By this I mean that Marx addresses the human nature of never being satisfied. The satisfaction that one act brings us is never enough, so we create new goals and needs to pursue.

This directly deals with the trait of greed. With this statement, Marx is saying that the act of wanting more than you currently have is a natural part of being human. In fact, it is one of the things that helps separate humans from animals, which is extremely important to Marx. It also is clear that someone like Adam Smith would agree with Marx on this point.

A key point of the German Ideology is that what we are surrounded by helps define what is “normal” and that we all strive to be in that group. By highlighting the fact that the continuing cycle of trying to satisfy new needs is a key human trait, Marx is saying that striving for more, and greed, is a major part of normal human life.

I chose to use these two works because I feel that they are the two papers we have read that most directly address the issue of labor value. Beyond that, they are also in conflict with each other. In his paper Locke talks at great length about the high value of labor. On the other hand, Duck is a lowly field laborer, seeing little from his long hours working in the field. This conflict between the two authors is extremely important because it shows that there can be very different values placed on labor and that this is a question that deserves to be written about.

As of now, there are a few points I plan on making in my paper:

• Labor cannot have an intrinsic value because not all labor is the same. For example, in Thresher’s Labour, Duck describes how the women working in the field do significantly less then he and the other men do. Clearly, labour by some individuals is much more valuable.
• In Locke’s paper, he mainly discusses an individual working to collect what is necessary to survive. In this case, that individual is the only benefactor from this labor, so they are the ones to place value. This is why Locke is able to say that labor has such a high value and that it brings property.
• The reason that Duck doesn’t feel that he benefits directly from his labor is that he is not working for himself, rather he is working for someone else. Duck’s labor holds more value to the owner of the field than it does to Duck himself.

In “Wealth of Nations”, Smith talks at great length about how dividing labor greatly increases production and profits, saying that “the division of labour, however, so far as it can be introduced, occasions, in every art, a proportionable increase of the productive powers of labour.” (Ch. 1) He uses the example of a group of people making pins. Each is specialized in one small part of the production process, allowing the group to produce a much greater amount of the final product.

Smith identifies that this division of labor is not our natural instinct. Rather, we naturally want to trade goods with other individuals to obtain what we want. If I am make pins alone, completing the entire process myself, then I am able to trade with anybody that needs pins. However, if I am only a part of the pin making process, I can really can only trade to the person who is next in the production line. Because that good is so specialized, the audience for it is just as narrow.

It seems that while it can help us get more “shiny things”, the division of labor can often prevent us from acting on one of our natural instincts. I think this question of generalization vs. specialization is a continuing issue that all types of people are forced to deal with in the economy. We generally think of a specialized good or service to be of higher quality and value. For the person providing that good, they have chosen to sacrifice a larger market for specialization. This trade off that Smith wrote about 200 years ago still affects society today.

If these two met, I believe that they would easily agree that labour both holds and creates value. It is one of the key points of Locke’s writing, and is necessary in Mandeville’s poem. Where I think the real disagreement would occur is on the issue of greed and taking more than what is needed to survive. Clearly Locke believes that greed doesn’t help a society in any fashion, while Mandeville takes a completely opposite stance. He even goes as far as to say that deceit is key to a successful economy.

Due to the fact that these two men hold such opposite opinions, I’m not sure they would be able to come to any sort of an agreement. Depending on when this discussion occurs would happen however could be interesting. More modern societies resemble Mandeville’s hive much more than Locke’s society. Due to this fact, Mandeville, using his description of the demise of the honest bees, may be able to change Locke’s opinion of greed.

The first word from Swift’s poem that I find important is the word “lie”. Swift calls it a lie when other men describe Celia as sweet and cleanly. This one word summarizes the feelings that the main character Strephon is experiencing as he snoops through Celia’s dressing room. He feels betrayed and fooled when he discovers what she must take many disgusting steps to maintain her appearance. Strephon starts believing that female beauty is in fact a lie, and the value he has placed on that trait has been lost.

The second word important word is “raised”. This word is used by the narrator to when they say that Strephon should marvel at the beauty that rises from filth. This represents the exact opposite belief and experience that Strephon is currently going through. By using the word raise, Swift is creating an image that is very positive of women and their beauty. Rather than being as revolting as their dressing rooms, women are able to escape it and overcome the disadvantages of the normal human body to appear perfect.

I chose these two words because they are used in completely opposite manners and yet are both used to communicate the same overall point. Each describes the same discovery, one expressing disappointment and anger while the other displays respect and understanding. I think this contrast between the two is the very essence of this poem. That something that may be of little to no value to one individual can hold great value to another and that value is not an objective quality.