Article Review of De Vries' The Industrial Revolution and the Industrious Revolution

The idea of an industrious revolution, according to De Vries, was an influx of consumerism. He evaluates the idea that supply and demand became intertwined as the birth of a new consumerism sprouted Industrial Revolution. If we read further into De Vries work, we find ‘The industrious revolution: consumer behaviour and the household economy, 1650 to the present’ which enters into the idea that ‘the rise of industriousness, [is] defined as a combination of long hours of market work for adult males, and wide-spread participation in the labor market by women and children’. It can be easily seen that De Vries has a reoccurring theme when it comes to his ideas of the industrial revolution and delves deep into historiography previously overlooked such as the previously mentioned ‘protoindustrialization’ ideas of Franklin Mendel. 

De Vries says himself that his ideas are not original, but he does set out a clear explanation towards a possible industrious revolution. However, his writing is vague towards any specifics, such as particular countries and regions, which saw different aspects of Industrialisation, and indeed industrious revolution.  He is not alone in his opinions, yet he lacks evidence in a deeper contextual level. It is arguable that his writing is too short and does not have the space necessary to assess specifics in order to provide a true in depth analysis of the argument he attempts to portray.  

His work is indeed a useful asset to the study of Industrial Economic History, particularly with regards to household economy. De Vires is useful in expanding a particular opinion towards the idea of industrious revolution and the economic household, with the idea of a new consumerism. De Vries arguments are convincing to a certain extent, and highlight a different way to look at the emergence of the industrial revolution. His concluding idea that the Industrial Revolution has diminished is supported however in good arguments, the topic has become broadened and is regarded in a much different way to what it was. In terms of historiography, the article increases in value as contemporaries change in opinion.  However, it is true, that for the argument to be thorough De Vries should have extended his levels of research and included specific examples in a longer and more detailed book.