Classic and Contemporary Poetry: Explained

Bob Hicok’s "After Working Sixty Hours Again for What Reason" is a wry, absurdist meditation on the futility of labor, the paradoxes of bureaucracy, and the cyclical nature of economic exploitation. The poem unfolds like a Kafkaesque fable, where the act of moving a stone back and forth becomes an allegory for meaningless work, corruption, and the illusion of progress. Through deadpan humor, logical inversions, and an escalating absurdity, Hicok critiques systems that reward inefficiency and complicate simplicity, ultimately questioning the purpose of labor itself.

The opening line, “The best job I had was moving a stone from one side of the road to the other,” immediately sets up the poem’s ironic tone. The phrase "best job" suggests that, despite its apparent absurdity, this task stands out among the speaker’s employment history—perhaps because of its simplicity, or because it exposes the deeper absurdities of work. This mundane action—moving a stone—becomes the focal point of an elaborate bureaucratic entanglement, hinting at the way modern labor often prioritizes paperwork, permits, and transactional obstacles over actual productivity.

The next lines introduce the first of many paradoxes: “This required a permit which required a bribe. / The bribe took all my salary.” Here, the concept of work is immediately complicated—before the speaker can perform his task, he must first navigate a system that demands payment simply for permission to work. The irony is deepened by the next revelation: “Yet because I hadn’t finished the job I had no salary, / and to pay the bribe I took a job moving the stone the other way.” The act of labor is not tied to actual productivity but to the perpetuation of a system that generates its own necessity. The speaker is not paid to complete a task but is instead caught in a loop where the work exists only to justify itself.

The official overseeing this process is similarly trapped within the absurdity: “Because the official wanted his bribe, he gave me a permit for the second job.” There is no genuine oversight or logic behind the bureaucratic process—only the self-sustaining mechanism of bribes and pointless labor. When the speaker logically suggests that “the work would be best completed if I did nothing,” the official paradoxically "complimented my brain and wrote a letter to my employer suggesting promotion." This moment highlights one of the poem’s key critiques: intelligence, when applied rationally, is seen as dangerous within systems designed to perpetuate their own inefficiencies. Rather than rewarding logic, the system rewards participation in its arbitrary rituals.

The imagery of the official’s letter is particularly striking: “on stationery bearing the wings of a raptor spread in flight over a mountain smaller than the bird.” This emblem—of a powerful predator soaring over a diminished landscape—subtly reinforces the themes of domination and disproportionate authority. The mountain should be imposing, yet it is dwarfed by the raptor, mirroring how the bureaucratic system, despite being ridiculous, looms over the lives of those entangled within it.

Fearing the speaker’s intelligence, his boss takes the absurdity to another level: “My boss, fearing my intelligence, paid me to sleep on the sofa and take lunch with the official who required a bribe to keep anything from being done.” The speaker’s presence alone becomes a threat to the system, and rather than allowing him to expose its contradictions, those in power decide it is safer (and more efficient) to simply pay him to do nothing. This echoes the earlier moment where the speaker realized that inaction would be the most effective course of action—except now, rather than being rewarded for his logic, he is bribed into compliance.

The poem then shifts to the speaker’s family, reinforcing how economic absurdities filter into personal life: “When I told my parents, they wrote my brother to come home from university to be slapped on the back of the head.” The phrase "to be slapped on the back of the head" suggests a tradition of discipline or enlightenment through physical correction, an absurd yet affectionate familial ritual. The fact that the brother dutifully returns for this suggests a deep-seated belief in cause-and-effect, even when the logic is unfounded.

However, the brother’s moment of revelation leads to another inversion: “At which point sense entered his body and he asked what I could do by way of a job.” The implication here is that absurdity must be confronted physically before rationality can be engaged. But the speaker’s response only deepens the paradox: “I pointed out there were stones everywhere trying not to move, / all it took was a little gumption to be the man who didn’t move them.” This statement transforms idleness into a form of labor, suggesting that work, in its most essential form, is merely the act of justifying one’s presence in the system. The phrase "stones everywhere trying not to move" humorously anthropomorphizes the objects of labor, as if even the natural world resists the pointless motion imposed upon it by human bureaucracy.

The final lines highlight the brother’s attempt to impose a traditional work ethic onto a nonsensical system: “Just yesterday he got up at dawn and shaved, / as if the lack of hair on his face has anything to do with the appearance of food on an empty table.” This closing image delivers a biting critique of performative labor and societal expectations. The act of shaving—often associated with professionalism and readiness for work—is rendered meaningless in the face of economic futility. The brother, despite witnessing the absurdity of labor firsthand, still clings to the notion that looking employable equates to actual sustenance.

Hicok’s poem, with its circular logic and escalating absurdities, presents a scathing indictment of bureaucratic inefficiency and the arbitrary nature of labor. The act of moving the stone—meaningless in itself—becomes a symbol for all work that exists merely to sustain a system rather than to create value. The speaker’s realization that inaction is the most logical course is met not with reward but with deeper entrenchment in the absurdity. This mirrors real-world structures where workers often find themselves trapped in cycles of inefficiency, red tape, and performative productivity.

Ultimately, "After Working Sixty Hours Again for What Reason" is a critique of a world where labor is disconnected from meaning, where intelligence is punished rather than rewarded, and where the illusion of progress is maintained through arbitrary motion. Hicok’s humor and irony sharpen the poem’s impact, making it both a satire of economic systems and a lament for those caught within them. The final image leaves the reader with a sense of quiet resignation—suggesting that, despite understanding the absurdity, most people will continue waking up, shaving, and participating, even as they remain unsure why.

Copyright (c) 2025 PoetryExplorer

Discover our Poem Explanations and Poet Analyses!

Other Poems of Interest...