Slaves to the Consumer Culture?

Usually on this site we talk about earning money, or trying to earn money. We don’t say much about spending it. Yet, despite the recent drop in consumer confidence, spend we do. The average family now has about zero savings and a credit card debt of close to $10,000. Is this because we don’t earn enough or because we spend too much? Are we wage slaves because we’re really slaves to the consumer culture?

So I was intrigued when I received a copy of freelance writer Judith Levine’s new book Not Buying It: My Year Without Shopping, which offers an intimate, often funny, first person, account of her attempt to go without. I recommend reading the whole thing, but here, in the meantime (and for those who can’t afford hardcover books), is an interview with the author.

BE: First I want to say how much I love your book. Maybe that’s partly because, like my last two books, it’s the kind of journalism you actually put your body into. You went a year without shopping for anything beyond the barest necessities, and you record your experiences in a diary fashion, full of both lively personal revelations and profound philosophical reflections. No one can read it without thinking hard about the role of consumerism in their own lives. Let me start with the obvious question: What led you to undertake this experiment?

JL: It was Christmastime, 2003. I dropped a large paper shopping bag into an icy, slushy puddle on a New York street corner. As I fished it out and trudged to the subway, I started free associating around the subject of shopping. Buying stuff was the way my culture gave me to be happy, fulfilled, beautiful, amused, and -- this season -- generous. But was this the only way? My thoughts led back to September 11, when the President informed us that going shopping was also the way to be patriotic -- and defeat terrorism! Right then and there, I decided: I’m not buying it.

I knew I wouldn’t be able to live with buying stuff. But I thought: what if I eliminated purchasing as much as possible from my daily life? Its absence might illuminate the role it plays, not just in my own feelings, finances, and relationships, but in the bigger world around me.

BE: Another obvious, but also philosophically vexing, question: How did you define necessities? This is a question that comes up whenever anyone tries to define poverty or a living wage. There’s the category of “sundries” for example: Is deodorant a “necessity”? Conditioner? Moisturizer? (Incidentally, I grew up in a household that didn’t even buy shampoo, at least not till I was in my teens. We used Ivory soap.)

JL: As you suggest, the categories of Necessity and Luxury are relative. Relative to what you had as a child, to what your neighbor has, to what you see on TV that Jessica Simpson has. A West African villager uses a quart of gas a month, to cook. A resident of Los Angeles, whose commutes 100 miles a day in an SUV that gets 16 miles to the gallon, burns six gallons of gas a day. Both “need” this fuel to sustain their lives.

Going beyond food and shelter, is pleasure a necessity? And how much or what kind of pleasure? My partner, Paul, and I argued about that one. For instance, being Italian, he insisted that wine was a necessity; it was like milk to him, like water! To me, wine was a luxury. We both won that argument. Paul made wine with two Italian friends, which was thoroughly enjoyable. And I get to drink the wine -- an excellent Bordeaux.

BE: One of the hardest things you had to do without was the kind of entertainment that costs money -- movies and meals out for example. Tell us what you did for entertainment?

JL: When you eliminate private consumption, you are forced into the public spaces for stimulation, amusement, and meaning. We went weekly to the public library to borrow books and films and hear readings and lectures. We kept track of the blooming “schedules” at the botanic gardens. We rode our bikes and walked, often five to seven miles a day, invited friends to dinner -- and just hung out. This wasn’t always easy. For one thing, those public amenities, like the libraries, are in sorry shape: they’re closed half the time! And, not seeing the latest movies or reading the latest books, not being able to meet people in cafes and restaurants, I sometimes felt antsy, isolated, and kind of stupid.

BE: You claim to have freed up a lot of time by not shopping -- time you were able to put into activism in your community. I’m pretty much a congenital non-shopper, except for the occasional lightning raid on Ann Taylor when I need to look “professional,” but I couldn’t give up take-out food. Now that my kids are grown up I don’t feel like cooking from scratch any more. Wasn’t cooking a big time sink for you in your year of not shopping?

JL: I’m a genius at getting a good meal on the table in less than a half-hour -- about the time it takes to go to the deli, choose your dinner, pay for it, and take it home. Put up some water to boil. Sautee some garlic, black olives, and anchovies in oil, add some chopped broccoli rabe or kale, cook, stirring occasionally, for about 5 minutes. Meanwhile, throw some pasta in the water and let it cook. Drain the pasta, toss it into the greens with some Parmesan cheese. Delicious -- and you can cook and eat with the same fork, saving dishwashing time.

What I learned during my year was how time-consuming shopping can be. Think of the hours that disappear while you compare the prices of inkjet printers online, then deal with the shipping (because you weren’t home to sign for the package), figure out the rebate card, and locate the proper cable that didn’t come with the printer -- then return the whole thing because it wasn’t much better than your old printer.

But back to cooking. I like to cook; it’s never a waste of time for me. If you hate cooking, far be it from me to make you feel guilty for picking up a meal at Taco Bell. My point is, buying doesn’t necessarily save time.

BE: By not shopping for a year, you came to understand what some the real temptations of the consumer culture are. What exactly is the deep, psychic lure of the mall?

JL: Our culture gives us this one method of fixing every problem -- boredom, loneliness, self-doubt. Shopping gives us hope -- hope for more happiness, more beauty, more status, more fun. And, in some sense, it works, at least until the next time you feel bored, lonely, or dissatisfied. And then there are more products and experiences to buy -- more hope.

I got bored this year, and I didn’t have shopping to solve it. That’s when I recognized another, deeper psychological dynamic involved in consumption. The psychologist Adam Phillips calls boredom “the mood of diffuse restlessness which contains that most absurd and paradoxical wish, the wish for a desire.” Shopping defeats, or at least circumvents, boredom, but not only because it fills idle time or provides immediate gratification. The marketplace gives us something that precedes gratification: infinite names for desire -- Ben & Jerry’s Chunky Monkey ice cream, Kate Spade handbag, Caribbean cruise. Not once during the year did I experience “pent-up demand,” a surfeit of unfulfilled desire. Rather, I found myself in this infantile state of excruciating restlessness -- waiting to know what to want.

BE: You also, of course, got a lot of insight into the negative things consumerism does to us -- both psychologically and financially. Do you think it’s a big part of what keeps a lot of us working at jobs we hate?

JL: Absolutely. Paul and I did not set out to save money during the year. But we did (I paid off a credit card balance of almost $8,000). And here’s the most amazing thing: in 12 months we did not once argue about money. Nor did I worry about money -- and I am a person who generally worries about money constantly. What happened? I saw how happy and satisfied I could be without buying a lot of stuff -- including stuff I’d previously considered necessary, like new clothes or new books. Indeed, I was happier, since I wasn’t working all the time and worrying about keeping up with the credit card balance. This effect has lasted.

BE: You spent some time with a Voluntary Simplicity group. What did you end up thinking of the Voluntary Simplicity movement? Can it save the environment or change the world in other ways?

JL: Although I know that some of its leaders have a global, political vision of a world without overconsumption, the focus of Voluntary Simplicity is almost entirely personal. As far as I can see, the main effect is that a lot of closets get cleaned.

VS is a good consciousness-raiser; it helps people become mindful of what they are buying and throwing away. But the environmental degradation and social inequality that are caused by overconsumption in the West are great big problems that require great big policy solutions. Recycling is great, driving an efficient car is great. If everyone did these things, the effect would be immense. But the choices can’t be left to individuals. We have to get together to demand policies that make recycling compulsory but also easy to do; policies that set fuel-emissions standards to discourage gas-guzzlers from being produced in the first place. If Hummers are destroying the ozone layer and Hummers can’t meet the standards, the auto makers will make and market a different vehicle.

BE: A lot of the people who visit this website are struggling financially, many of them the victims of downsizings and “restructurings.” What advice can you give them about surviving on limited means? And is this a problem we can solve individually through our lifestyle choices or is it something we’re going to need to get together on?

JL: The answers are both personal and political. Certainly, people can resist the pressure to buy expensive toys or athletic shoes, and try to persuade their kids that they don’t need these things to be respected by their peers. They can eat less beef and more beans. But the main reason people are so stretched is that necessities -- and I mean real necessities, such as affordable health care, housing, and education -- are going through the roof.

We’ve been brainwashed to think that taxes are an expensive way to pay for these things, while buying them privately is cheaper and more efficient. But it’s the other way around. Economies of scale -- that is, sharing the wealth -- can make these necessities more affordable for all of us. Almost every industrialized country does it this way: they have tax-funded health care and daycare, and (don’t let the Bushies tell you otherwise) these services are just as good or better than what we have in America. Plus, those countries invest in the fun that everyone can share. In Paris, the neighborhood swimming pools are cheap and open all year round; Norway is laced with beautiful cross-country ski trails.

Polls tell us that even while Europeans have less private money to spend because they pay higher taxes, they’re more satisfied with life than their U.S. counterparts, and feel more connected with their larger communities and nations; this makes them more invested in the political process. That’s what Paul and I discovered when we stopped shopping: a bigger world, a world that both needs us and can reward us if we are willing to invest our time, our passion, and our money in it.

Comments

[Frances]

Thanks for this. Very simple, straightforward, and convincing!

[John]

Hmmm...the silence is deafening. An effective and peaceful protest is simply to curb your participation in the economy by spending less. If enough people did so, it will most certainly get attention and hasten change. This is perhaps the only vulnerability of Corporate America.

[Hattie]

Hmmm...the silence is deafening.
Right, John.
I don't like to think of my present affuence as unearned or immodest, but I know it is no longer available to people of the middle middle class that my husband and I came from. It is based on things like the free public education my husband got in the 50's (well,not exactly free, his tuition at Berkeley then was $28.00 a semester) and the career he was able to follow as a result of the fine start he got. We have a pleasant and comfortable life because of his ability to live and work where he pleases, thanks to telecommunication. We can comfortably afford what we want, give money to our kids, travel, etc.
I've always worked, doing the socially worthwhile stuff, teaching, volunteering, in other words the stuff that is not well paid or not paid at all.
But we're a dying breed. The largesse to the young that got us started no longer exists.

[Hattie]

Commenting more directly on Barbara's post:
We watch what we spend and don't shop much. Our craving for stuff is not very great. But that's because we have what we want. Air travel is our big "sin."

[Katie]

Barbara -- Thanks for this. I'm really looking forward to reading this book. I already have it on hold at the library. Yes, the library, where books are free, "for those that can't afford hardcover books". Just wanted to make that suggestion!

[theresa]

One nasty little secret that becomes more apparent each day is that the US tax revolts over the last 30 years have been more about *who* was perceived to be *getting* all the social services at the expense of the *enslaved* middle class. Desegregation and school busing were two of the main triggers for Americans to abandon support of public services -- and public spaces. Gore Vidal wrote how Prop 13 in California and Prop 2.5 in Massachusetts were just suburb-speak for "get the blacks" which, in the 21st Century, now means "get the minorities and immigrants." We don't mind paying for public libraries, schools, and parks if the only "public" who uses them resemble ourselves, but for all our talk of "equality" we are a country that is becoming both balkanized and bankrupt, where peace means a nice secure bunker lined with mirrors.

Europe until recently was pretty homogeneous, but they too now are experiencing the same sorts of tensions over their public spaces as different cultures move in. France responded by warehousing their immigrants in far Parisian suburbs, and other countries used similar ploys. In Germany, it is more of a psychological corral, where kids who are second generation Germans but of Turkish heritage are still considered foreign.

So "public generosity" is already rife with its own issues.

[Hattie]

JL: the main reason people are so stretched is that necessities -- and I mean real necessities, such as affordable health care, housing, and education -- are going through the roof.
Exactly. That's why we have to be so careful in our day to day consumer decisions while at the same time working for change.

[Paul]

If you want to save money, do not shop at Costco or Sams Club: going there for necessities like bread or milk can easily cost you a hundred dollars or more! :-)

[Hattie]

That's right! Self-restraint goes out the window as you browse around looking at all that cool stuff.

[janinsanfran]

Great discussion. I try not to consume unless I can define an real need for myself, but this is hard. My parents never got anything new until the old wore out. And stuff wore out less rapidly in their heyday.

So can I get a new dishdrainer even though the old one, though dingy, would still serve? I did, but I am still not sure about this.

[Gwyn]

The observation of finding public entertainment was particularly interesting to me. More and more, I think a huge aspect of American loneliness and boredom, which brings us to the mall, is a result of our "cocooning." We've given up those public places that were centers of conversation and entertainment in exchange for home entertainment centers, which we experience in isolation. Spend any time in European countries, and you see a lot more of the "joie de vivre" in the public square.

[theresa]

But De Tocqueville noted that Americans were never ones for public social discourse -- it's a cultural thing more than economics, I think. Cocooning is more prevalent when Americans feel forced to share, something they hate.

Restrictive covenants on deeds, restricted country clubs -- we've never been much for embracing our fellows, and this tendency, once limited to the upper classes, is just about the only thing that has trickled down to the lower...

[Victoria]

I'm just curious: do you guys think that spending, if not for the more bare necessities, constitues immoral behavior?

[Victoria]

What is so immoral with savoring some niceties of life? I'm a college student, and I work damned hard for the meager money I earn; I don't see why I should feel guilty if I want to purchase a new pair of shoes, or a nice dress. What's so wrong about treating myself to a nice meal every week? I certainly don't feel pressured by 'consumer culture'; if you go into my closet, you'll quickly see the few 'new' items I own do not consitute fashion in any way, shape or form. Am I really expected to treat these few niceties as a "sin"? Is a more 'moral' choice to give whatever extra money I have to charity? And, wouldn't my lack of spending(and others acting in a similar manner) simply lessen demand ,foster a decreasing demand for labor, thus catalyzing an increase in unemployment?

I also think that perhaps the author of this book took the notion of spending as patriotism out of context. I was younger when I heard that speech, but I believe Bush implied was that we should conduct our commercial/consumer activities as normal, as a decrease in trade sparked by fear would significantly hurt the economy, especially in the tourism and hospitality industries. He wasn't exactly suggesting: hey, go out and spend money, because wanton consumerism is the American way.

Further, nobody is necessarily chained by consumer culture: it certainly takes an effort of will to go to a shopping mall, or walk into a store on the street. If you don't want to feel inhibitedby your credit cards, cut them in half and work to pay them off; or purchase a debit card, as they will not allow you to exceed your limit(at least the programs I've come across). You do not HAVE to spend money on things that you genuinely do not want or need. I don't have to tell you about the number of credit card offers I've received in the last year(I'd say, around at least 50); of course I could have cowed to them and incurred several thousands dollars worth of debt. But I didn't, because I knew I didn't have the money, and it feels wrong to spend money that isn't actually mine. Maybe relaying the blame of consumption induced debt upon consumer culture merely shifts responsibility, so that people who are in debt because they spend money they do not have quite obviously regret their actions.

[Faith]

Great discussion. I just finished reading the book Blowback, by Chalmers Johnson. It became clear as I read that American consumerism is not only propping up our economy, but the economies of many Asian countries. Their growth (and the "hollowing out" of our industries) is based on a model of ever-increasing consumerism which will buy Asian-made products. This is one of the reasons that Asian banks are happy to lend our banks money, which our banks loan as credit card debt, in order to buy Asian-made products. The U.S. looks favorably upon this arrangement because, the government is worried that if Asian countries are not kept happy, they might fall prey to 'communist' leaders (read populist leaders) who would recall the bank debt and also perhaps not allow our military bases to remain in their countries. What I am saying is that our consumerism props up American economic imperialism. This is why, as one person noted, things don't last as long as they used to. Manufacturers like this because you will buy more when stuff wears out. We as ordinary citizens play our part in this scheme when we judge others for not wearing the 'right' fashion or having the 'right' car. I am not positing any answers here
-- I am not a huge consumer, but I buy my fair share of airline tickets, computers (I usually wait until the old one dies, except I did buy a flat screen recently since I am a professional photographer and the images really do show up as more sharp on it) and clothes (usually made in Asian countries.) I think it's important to recognize that every purchase I make is really a contribution to the American economic imperialist project, and then see if I still 'need' it when I'm at the cashier's. I try to buy American, Italian, Turkish, German, and other products not made in low-wage countries.

[Laure Miller]

I have needs. I have to have a house to live in - so I bought one. I could have gotten a mini-estate *gag* but preferred a small house in a predominantly African-American neighborhood (although I am white, if that matters, which it doesn't to me) because I knew prices there were lower.

I need food, so I buy that - a lot of it, with teenagers in the house. We also have a small garden.

Gotta pay utilities, but there are ways to cut those. Candles are SO romantic! Heat can come from cuddling in bed with a sweetie, and what heat you have can be kept inside by your standard weather-stripping, etc. We use water-saver showerheads and turn on the AC only when our eyeballs are sweating.

I do love shiny new things, but my last computer was 8 years old before it gave up the ghost, and this computer was built from a barebones kit. I would rather feel clever than broke.

Clothing? I am the Queen of Goodwill, Dorcas House (benfits Union Rescue Mission for the homeless), Savers (benefits ARC), and Salvation Army. Some of the things I have found there were just unbelieveable. Often - before school uniforms came into vogue hereabouts - I could get 4 kids all their school clothes for under 100$.

Our vehicle, which my husband and I share, is a 1971 Ford truck. Not the greratest in terms of fuel economy, but we only live 7 miles from our jobs. Our next car will be a Mercedes SmartCar, should the US ever allow such a good idea.

[Heather]

I just listened to your interview. Which brought home to me some facts one we have less to live on per year than you saved and have to turn every dollar over twice before we decide what necessity we can manage to go without. Because of this most of the things you went without we cannot afford anyway. I am the sort of person who lists all the money I spend in a year and come to the conclusion that the only way I could save any money at all was to give up my volunteer work for which I have to pay transport and related costs my biggest exspense that I could trim. Also not buy any stamps (I would love to buy more) or seed and potting mix for my garden.
I suppose what you give up is really only relevant to what you have in the first place.

[Heather]

Well there we go I got carried away by Judith Levine's interview. I made a point of listening to it because I thought it might have something interesting that could help me. Thank goodness I cannot afford to buy it I would have been disapointed. I always say you learn something from almost everything new each day. What did I learn from this? That there must be a lot of people out there with a lot of money that don't know how to spend it wisely and now if they buy the book they will make Judith richer and if they follow the advice she gives they will become richer as well. Same old market principal create a demand and then supply it.

[Bennett Levine]

Never paid more than a quarter at the Met?! What a fucking deadbeat. Judith should be ashamed of herself! I bet she doesn't tip in restaurants either, poor thing. (I wanted to write to her directly but couldn't find her web page or email.)

[Costkiller]

interesting post !

[Debt Rescue]

If you want to earn a better living proper focus on income generation is important to minimize over spending and mismanagement .