"These groups within a society can he distinguished according as to whether, like an army or an orchestra, they function as a single body; or whether they are united merely to defend their common interests and otherwise function as separate individuals"
About this Quote
Read is quietly drawing a political line in the sand, using two deceptively neutral metaphors to sort social life into competing moral models. An “army or an orchestra” sounds like praise: disciplined, coordinated, capable of producing force or beauty. But the phrasing also carries the chill of subordination. Armies erase the self for command; orchestras, even at their most sublime, still depend on a score and a conductor. The individual becomes a function.
Against that, Read offers a looser, interest-based association: people “united merely to defend their common interests” who “otherwise function as separate individuals.” The word “merely” is doing sly work. On the surface, it downplays the grandeur of collective identity. Underneath, it elevates a different kind of legitimacy: solidarity as a tool, not a totalizing faith. It’s a sketch of civil society where cooperation is episodic and consent-driven, not permanent and identity-consuming.
Context matters because Read wasn’t just a poet in the decorative sense; he was a major voice in mid-century British cultural criticism and a committed anarchist thinker shaped by the wreckage of two world wars. In that shadow, the “single body” ideal stops looking like harmony and starts looking like the mass politics that marched Europe into catastrophe. The quote’s intent is diagnostic, almost clinical: if you want to understand a society, ask whether its groups demand fusion or simply coordination. The subtext is a warning that unity can be a weapon, and that freedom often survives in the unglamorous space where people collaborate without surrendering themselves.
Against that, Read offers a looser, interest-based association: people “united merely to defend their common interests” who “otherwise function as separate individuals.” The word “merely” is doing sly work. On the surface, it downplays the grandeur of collective identity. Underneath, it elevates a different kind of legitimacy: solidarity as a tool, not a totalizing faith. It’s a sketch of civil society where cooperation is episodic and consent-driven, not permanent and identity-consuming.
Context matters because Read wasn’t just a poet in the decorative sense; he was a major voice in mid-century British cultural criticism and a committed anarchist thinker shaped by the wreckage of two world wars. In that shadow, the “single body” ideal stops looking like harmony and starts looking like the mass politics that marched Europe into catastrophe. The quote’s intent is diagnostic, almost clinical: if you want to understand a society, ask whether its groups demand fusion or simply coordination. The subtext is a warning that unity can be a weapon, and that freedom often survives in the unglamorous space where people collaborate without surrendering themselves.
Quote Details
| Topic | Teamwork |
|---|
More Quotes by Herbert
Add to List
