Seminar notes: Consumer society

Sahlins, Nomadic peoples

Small goods are in general better than big goods. In the final analysis “the relative ease of transportation of the article” will prevail, so far as determining its disposition, over its relative scarcity or labor cost. For the “ultimate value,” Warner writes, “is freedom of movement.” … “desire to be free from the burdens and responsibilities of objects which would interfere with the society’s itinerant existence,”

They do not know how to take care of their belongings. No one dreams of putting them in order, folding them, drying or cleaning them, hanging them up, or putting them in a neat pile. If they are looking for some particular thing, they rummage carelessly through the hodgepodge of trifles in the little baskets. Larger objects that are piled up in a heap in the hut are dragged hither and yon with no regard for the damage that might be done them. … Expensive things that are given them are treasured for a few hours, out of curiosity; after that they thoughtlessly let everything deteriorate in the mud and wet. The less they own, the more comfortable they can travel, and what is ruined they occasionally replace. Hence, they are completely indifferent to any material possessions.

Omnia mea mecum porto

“All that is mine I carry with me.”

Bias of Priene

from Güllübahçe, Aydın

A dusty and tired messenger brings a news to the city that they will be attacked by the roman legion. After this message the citizens are in big panic and confusion and they decide to live the city with everything they possessed. While the people are walking beside the heavily loaded carts, their fellow citizen, the old philosopher Bias, walks with nothing at all. When they asked him: – “Why are you living all your property to the enemies?”. The old man wisely answered: – “Omnia mea mecum porto!”. The Greek philosopher thought of his wisdom (knowledge) and that he can always carry with him his ONLY REAL property, thanks to his memory.

Belk, Possessions and the extended self

We regard our possessions as parts of ourselves

we extend our fragile selves by means of our possessions
we are what we possess
everything that is “mine” is also “me”

Especially when we are able to control them

we control our arms and legs — they are ours
the same thing is the case with everything else we can control

We impose our identities on possessions, and possessions impose their identities on us

The more we are possessed, or possess, the object,

the more it is a part of ourselves
this is true even for the letters in our names

Developmental psychology

Allport, 1937

we develop our identity through identification with objects
from safety blankets — to objects that symbolize other people

Places and experiences

also a part of the extended self

Loss of possessions

Prisons and other disciplinary institutions

the first thing they do is to deprive you of your possessions
deprive you of your identity
you are forced to become indistinguishable from everyone else
the identity is given to you by the institution

If we lose something we feel like we have been violated

it is not just the monetary value of the thing
we have lost a part of ourselves
polluted, raped
same for those who lose possessions in natural disasters

When we throw away old things

we lose a part of ourselves

Cars

extensions of the male ego
obvious phallic symbols

So what about people who don’t have cars

can not having something also be an extension of the self?

Anthropological examples

We invest labor in something and externalize ourselves in objects

whatever object to which we direct effort and attention
cf. Locke’s theory of property

The practice of burying the dead with their possessions

archeologists assume that we can learn about a person from their possessions

Mourning for dead people

we are mourning for a loss of self

Sympathetic magic

using hair or nail clippings
they are a way of getting at the person

Fury directed at the possessions of deposed dictators

or statues of them

Individual selves vs. collective selves

there are cultural differences here
not much discussed in this article

Having, Doing, Being

What you can do

what you can control
learning to ride a bicycle, use a computer, drive a car

Our desire for a thing arises from the fact that others want it

cf. Milan Kundera

Gifts as a way of extending ourselves

Knowledge

as a way to control
Virgin Mary had not “known a man”

Life span

Young couples value what point to the future

old couples value what points to the past

Old people

they want proof that their lives have made a difference
that they once were powerful and popular

Possessions as a way of storing memories

they tell us about our selves — about our lives

Contamination

Fear of being taken over by others

rape as an extreme example
fear of sex
fear of germs

How we can swallow our own saliva

but not spit in a cup and drink it
we are worried about things coming from the outside
or eating from someone else’s plate

Collective identities

sharing clothes
sharing food

Great differences in consumption patters between families from different social classes

“Crying Gypsies” as lower class
tacky, cheap

MBA students who are more insecure about their prospects

more likely to dress like proper businessmen

College students who decorate their student rooms

less likely to drop out

“The Century of the Self”

Adam Curtis

episodes here

Edward Berneys

The words of Paul Mazur, a leading Wall Street banker working for Lehman Brothers in 1927, are cited: “We must shift America from a needs- to a desires-culture. People must be trained to desire, to want new things, even before the old have been entirely consumed. […] Man’s desires must overshadow his needs.”

Curtis ends by saying that, “Although we feel we are free, in reality, we—like the politicians—have become the slaves of our own desires,” and compares Britain and America to ‘Democracity’, an exhibit at the 1939 New York World’s Fair created by Edward Bernays.