The social benefits and economic limitations of mill life from the late 1910s to mid 1950s are exposed in Faucette's account. She describes the twelve-hour shifts and physical layout of the mill. Faucette explains how the mill owner's acceptance of the new eight-hour workday labor law prevented the growth of organized union activity. Instead of painting a picture of discontent, she downplays the perils of working in a mill. Faucette remembers that workers rarely complained about loud noises or potential health hazards. In fact, they largely accommodated changing work tasks and found avenues for relaxation at the mill. Because Glencoe Mill relied on water to power the machine, the unpredictability of nature resulted in free time for mill workers. Not until the advent of electrical power did workers have to relinquish leisure time during the arid summer season. Faucette also portrays the cohesive nature of a mill village among blacks and whites. Although blacks were omitted from employment as mill hands, they forged a social bond as domestic workers. Faucette's family demonstrated how mill hands took care of their own when they adopted an orphaned child of a fellow mill worker. The social and religious socialization of mill workers is exemplified throughout the interview. Faucette hints, however, that the emergence of a heightened consumer culture and increased job mobility contributed to the loss of the mill village's social cohesion.