Mass and Individual in Consumer Society

June 2, 2009

The pro­duc­tivist bias inher­ent in both clas­si­cal eco­nom­ics and ortho­dox Marx­ism has delayed the recog­ni­tion of the ‘con­sumer rev­o­lu­tion’ that accom­pa­nied the indus­trial one and has come, over the course of the last cen­tury, increas­ingly to drive the trans­for­ma­tion of cap­i­tal. Today, how­ever, the con­sump­tion of com­modi­ties has entan­gled itself with almost every facet of social life. Indeed, the cri­tique of con­sump­tion is now arguably fun­da­men­tal to any cri­tique of con­tem­po­rary cap­i­tal­ism. I have enti­tled this exam­i­na­tion area, ‘Mass and Indi­vid­ual in Con­sumer Soci­ety,’ hop­ing to cap­ture in this phrase a spe­cific set of issues related to the analy­sis of con­sumer cap­i­tal­ism. To elu­ci­date them, I will here address each of the title’s key terms in reverse order.

To speak of ‘con­sumer soci­ety’ rather than other, closely related terms (e.g., ‘adver­tis­ing’ or ‘con­sumerism’) is to address the social and cul­tural trans­for­ma­tions engen­dered by the metas­ta­si­sa­tion of the com­mod­ity form and its “pro­mo­tional logic” (Wer­nick 1991) rather than the prob­lems posed by par­tic­u­lar kinds of ‘bad con­sump­tion.’ Zyg­munt Bau­man (2007) pro­vides a clear for­mu­la­tion of this distinction:

If con­sumerist cul­ture is the pecu­liar fash­ion in which the mem­bers of a soci­ety of con­sumers think of behav­ing or in which they behave ‘unre­flex­ively’ […] then the soci­ety of con­sumers stands for the pecu­liar set of exis­ten­tial con­di­tions under which the prob­a­bil­ity is high that most men and women will embrace the con­sumerist rather than any other cul­ture, and that most of the time they will obey its pre­cepts to the best of their abil­ity. (P. 52)

A first group of ref­er­ences attempt to account for the emer­gence of such a soci­ety of con­sumers (Camp­bell 1987; Cross 2000; Ewen 2001; Frank 1997; Leiss, Kline, Jhally, and Bot­ter­ill 2005; McK­endrick, Brewer, and Plumb 1982; Williams 1982). They are pri­mar­ily his­tor­i­cal in ori­en­ta­tion; how­ever, in describ­ing the devel­op­ment of mod­ern con­sumerism and expli­cat­ing its dif­fer­ences from other social for­ma­tions, these authors also pro­vide an ini­tial the­o­ret­i­cal descrip­tion of con­sumer soci­ety. As Grant McCracken (1988) sug­gests, the rhetoric of the con­sumer rev­o­lu­tion is some­what decep­tive: though the aggre­gate trans­for­ma­tions described by these his­to­ri­ans have indeed changed cap­i­tal­ism in pro­found ways, it has been a ‘long rev­o­lu­tion.’ Thus, rather than seek­ing a rad­i­cal rup­ture, we must look to a num­ber of his­tor­i­cal peri­ods in dif­fer­ent soci­eties to trace the geneal­ogy of con­sumer soci­ety. Key moments include Eng­land in the 18th cen­tury (the indus­trial com­mod­ity, dis­tri­b­u­tion and mar­ket­ing appa­ra­tuses), France in the 19th cen­tury (the Arcades, depart­ment stores, and the con­sumerist gaze), and the United States in the 20th cen­tury (increas­ing mass-mediation of mar­ket­ing com­mu­ni­ca­tion, post-war afflu­ence, and ‘hip consumerism’).

The key­word ‘indi­vid­ual’ refers to a sec­ond group of texts that is con­cerned with explain­ing con­sumer behav­iour (Bau­drillard 1981, 1996; Camp­bell 1987; Dou­glas and Ish­er­wood 1979; Fiske 1989; McCracken 1988; Miller 1997, 1998). These authors are largely from anthro­po­log­i­cal and cul­tural stud­ies back­grounds, and much of their work is based on ethno­graphic accounts of every­day con­sump­tion (Jean Bau­drillard is the notable excep­tion). Their attempts to make con­sump­tion deci­sions ratio­nal and explic­a­ble serve to reveal the com­plex­ity of the con­sumer sub­jec­tiv­i­ties that pre­vail under the con­di­tions of con­tem­po­rary cap­i­tal­ism. They tend to priv­i­lege the expe­ri­ences of indi­vid­ual con­sumers over and against the total­ity of the soci­ety in which they live and often stress the plea­sure and the pos­si­bil­i­ties for the exer­cise of agency that can be derived from the acqui­si­tion and con­sump­tion of com­modi­ties. The key ques­tions, then, relate to how con­sumers appro­pri­ate the com­modi­ties fur­nished by cap­i­tal­ism and use them to pro­duce mean­ing in their every­day lives.

A third group of sources deals with the orga­ni­za­tion of con­sum­ing sub­jects into dif­fer­ent kinds of groups and audi­ences by the ratio­nal­iz­ing appa­ra­tuses of cap­i­tal and the cul­ture industry—a process that I have described using the key­word ‘mass.’ This group largely com­prises schol­ars from rad­i­cal or Marx­ist tra­di­tions (Adorno 1991; Bau­man 2007; Bour­dieu 1984; Horkheimer and Adorno 2001; Mar­cuse 1991; Wer­nick 1991) but is also inclu­sive of lib­eral cri­tiques of mass cul­ture (Gal­braith 1958; Holt 2000, 2002; Sim­mel 1957; Veblen 1953). Speak­ing in very gen­eral terms, these writ­ers are con­cerned with the effects that the com­mod­i­fi­ca­tion of culture—embodied, for exam­ple, in the struc­tures of mod­ern marketing—has on the human sub­jects who are pro­duced as con­sum­ing masses. Here, con­sumerism is a tool of class priv­i­lege that dis­torts people’s true needs and desires and serves to rein­force cap­i­tal­ist rela­tions of dom­i­na­tion. Also included within this group are a smaller set of sources describ­ing recent devel­op­ments in niche mar­ket­ing (Turow 1997) and the devel­op­ment of the lifestyle con­cept (Veal 1993), which rep­re­sents the increas­ing ratio­nal­iza­tion of the process of demand-creation.

Per­haps the major the­o­ret­i­cal chal­lenge in approach­ing this sub­ject is the large gulf that stands between the ‘con­sumer stud­ies’ lit­er­a­ture, with its focus on the eman­ci­pa­tory poten­tial of indi­vid­ual con­sump­tion, and the ‘mass soci­ety’ lit­er­a­ture, with its cri­tique of the repres­sive func­tions of con­sumerism. The for­mer tends to dis­miss the lat­ter as elit­ist and pes­simistic for its nor­ma­tive judge­ments on con­sump­tion and its recourse to spec­tres of false con­scious­ness and ide­o­log­i­cal manip­u­la­tion. For its part, the mass cul­ture cri­tique might sug­gest that more cel­e­bra­tory stud­ies have mis­taken the sub­jec­tive expe­ri­ences of plea­sure derived from indi­vid­ual acts of con­sump­tion for the objec­tive con­di­tions of con­straint or oppres­sion that are imposed by con­sumer society—a fact which is self-evident once the entire sys­tem of con­sumerism is con­sid­ered as a whole. Yet some form of rap­proche­ment between the two camps is nec­es­sary to make sense of the deeply con­tra­dic­tory phe­nom­e­non that is mod­ern consumerism.

Bib­li­og­ra­phy

Adorno, Teodor W. 1991. The Cul­ture Indus­try: Selected Essays on Mass Cul­ture. Lon­don: Rout­ledge. Chap­ters 2–4, 8.

Bau­drillard, Jean. 1981. For a Cri­tique of the Polit­i­cal Econ­omy of the Sign. St. Louis, MO: Telos Press.

—–. 1996. The Sys­tem of Objects. Lon­don: Verso.

Bau­man, Zyg­munt. 2007. Con­sum­ing Life. Malden, MA: Polity.

Bour­dieu, Pierre. 1984. Dis­tinc­tion: A Social Cri­tique of the Judge­ment of Taste. Cam­bridge, MA: Har­vard Uni­ver­sity Press

Camp­bell, Colin. 1987. The Roman­tic Ethic and the Spirit of Mod­ern Con­sumerism. New York: Basil Blackwell.

Cross, G. 2000. An All-Consuming Cen­tury: Why Com­mer­cial­ism Won in Mod­ern Amer­ica. New York: Colum­bia Uni­ver­sity Press. Chap­ters 1, 4, 7.

Dou­glas, Mary and Baron Ish­er­wood. 1979. The World of Goods: Towards an Anthro­pol­ogy of Con­sump­tion. Lon­don: Allen Lane.

Ewen, Stu­art. 2001. Cap­tains of Con­scious­ness: Adver­tis­ing and the Social Roots of the Con­sumer Cul­ture. New York: Basic Books.

Fiske, John. 1989. Read­ing the Pop­u­lar. Win­ches­ter, MA: Unwin Hyman. Chap­ters 1–2.

Frank, Thomas. 1997. The Con­quest of Cool: Busi­ness Cul­ture, Coun­ter­cul­ture, and the Rise of Hip Con­sumerism. Chicago: Uni­ver­sity of Chicago Press.

Gal­braith, John K. 1958. The Afflu­ent Soci­ety. Cam­bridge, MA: River­side Press.

Holt, Dou­glas B. 2000. “Does Cul­tural Cap­i­tal Struc­ture Amer­i­can Con­sump­tion?” Pp. 212–252 in The Con­sumer Soci­ety Reader, edited by J.B. Schor and D.B. Holt. New York: New Press.

—–. 2002. “Why Do Brands Cause Trou­ble? A Dialec­ti­cal The­ory of Con­sumer Cul­ture and Brand­ing.” Jour­nal of Con­sumer Research 29(1): 70–90.

Horkheimer, Max and Teodor W. Adorno. 2001. “The Cul­ture Indus­try: Enlight­en­ment as Mass Decep­tion.” Pp. 71–101 in Media and Cul­tural Stud­ies: Key­Works, edited by M.G. Durham and D.M. Kell­ner. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Leiss, William, Stephen Kline, Sut Jhally, and Jacque­line Bot­ter­ill. 2005. Social Com­mu­ni­ca­tion in Adver­tis­ing: Con­sump­tion in the Medi­ated Mar­ket­place. 3rd ed. New York: Rout­ledge. Intro­duc­tion and Chap­ters 1, 2, 7.

McCracken, Grant. 1988. Cul­ture and Con­sump­tion: New Approaches to the Sym­bolic Char­ac­ter of Con­sumer Goods and Activ­i­ties. Bloom­ing­ton, IN: Indi­ana Uni­ver­sity Press.

McK­endrick, Neil, John Brewer, and J.H. Plumb. 1982. The Birth of a Con­sumer Soci­ety: The Com­mer­cial­iza­tion of Eighteenth-Century Eng­land. Lon­don: Europa Publications.

Mar­cuse, Her­bert. 1991. One-Dimensional Man: Stud­ies in the Ide­ol­ogy of Advanced Indus­trial Soci­ety. 2nd ed. Boston: Bea­con Press.

Miller, Daniel. 1997. Cap­i­tal­ism: An Ethno­graphic Approach. New York: Berg.

—-. 1998. A The­ory of Shop­ping. Cam­bridge, UK: Polity Press.

Sim­mel, Georg. 1957. “Fash­ion.” Amer­i­can Jour­nal of Soci­ol­ogy 62(6): 541–558.

Turow, Joseph. 1997. Break­ing up Amer­ica: Adver­tis­ers and the New Media World. Chicago: Uni­ver­sity of Chicago Press.

Veal, A.J. 1993. “The Con­cept of Lifestyle: A Review.” Leisure Stud­ies 12(4): 233–252.

Veblen, Thorstein. 1953. The­ory of the Leisure Class: An Eco­nomic Study of Insti­tu­tions. New York: The New Amer­i­can Library.

Wer­nick, Andrew. 1991. Pro­mo­tional Cul­ture: Adver­tis­ing, Ide­ol­ogy, and Sym­bolic Expres­sion. Lon­don: Sage. Chap­ters 1–2, 5, 8.

Williams, Ros­alind. 1982. Dream Worlds: Mass Con­sump­tion in Late Nineteenth-Century France. Berkely: Uni­ver­sity of Cal­i­for­nia Press.


Thanks for read­ing. If you’d like to talk about this post, please feel free to tweet me @wooesque, find me on Google+, or email me at bmw@benjaminwoo.net.

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*