Лика Сидорова

Human Values in the Age of Consumerism

The end of the twentieth and beginning of the twenty-first centuries are often referred to as the Age of Consumerism. For example, S. Miles notices that “consumerism is the religion of the twentieth century (Dagevos 2005)”, while D. A. Statt argues “the 20th century is the century of the consumer (Dagevos 2005)”. Thus, public attention is drawn to consumption and the related human values. But has the consumption really become a basic human value or has it stayed just a small piece of everyday life?

Human values are difficult to discuss, because they are part of culture. Culture itself is a rather diluted phenomenon. Sir Edward Burnett Tylor (1832 – 1917), an English anthropologist, devised the first definition of culture; he argued that culture is a “complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, law, morals, custom and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society” (Haviland 1987). Edgar Schein (Lakomski 2001), a guru of the corporate leadership, defined culture as “a pattern of shared basic assumptions that the group learned as it solved its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems”. So, culture is shared, learned, rather than inherited, aimed at solving the problems of external adaptation and internal integration, and, consequently, dynamic.

As culture is a complex phenomenon, its structure inherits the same characteristic. It is often being compared to an iceberg. This metaphor underlines that the upper visible part of culture presents only 10% of the whole culture, while 90% are hidden under the surface. The upper, visible, layer consists of artifacts, rituals, and behaviour. The middle layer is composed of values and beliefs, while the lowest level are basic assumptions, which are unconscious. Therefore, artifacts may be observed in order to understand values better.

Art is a rich fount of artifacts. Art has always been developed in two directions, that is, art and secular art. While art has been a privilege of the most educated members of the upper-class society, and even an access to museums and galleries was strictly limited, secular art reached wider strata of society, though, the highest social strata as well. In such a way, art guarded spiritual values. Modern secular art is less access limited, more intelligible, and it has become mass or popular art indeed. Consequently, it carries new values, the values of the age of consumerism, that is buying, shopping, measuring life as a material thing rather than spiritual self-perfection.

Such a transformation is closely connected with the economic history of the twentieth century. The development of productive forces has raised efficiency and productivity of national economies, and, therefore, their level of economic development. With the rise of the latter, the quality of life has improved, that is, people have gained a possibility of consuming products of higher quality and greater quantity, they have received access to better education, and their leisure time has increased. Consequently, people have started to spend more money, and consumption has become a way of life. Hans Dagevos (Dagevos 2005) affirms that the axioms of modern era are “To have is to be (2005)”, “I am what I consume (2005)”, or “I shop therefore I am (2005)”.

Simultaneously, the demand on leisure activities has started to grow. Museums and galleries opened their doors to public, and, according to Fiona McLean (McLean 1997), entertainment, rather than storing and preserving art objects, has become a new function of museums. Theme parks appeared. The new technologies made it possible to record and transmit music and to film movies, while demand and free time stimulated their popularization. In such a way, the new “user” or “observer” of the art is, actually, a mass consumer. In such a limelight, the shift from mass consumption to mass-pop-culture is not surprising.

The starting and most vivid point in this relation are artworks of Andy Warhol. Andy Warhol attracted the attention to consumer values, brands in that context, more notably than ever before. He raised Coca-Cola bottle, Hershey chocolate bars, Campbell’s soup cans to the status of art objects worth seeing. However, what he has done could still be regarded as art, because Andy Warhol stepped out of the frames of trivial consciousness, he slid out the boundaries of ordinary perception and “silo mentality”, It was a great deed to force people to look on their life in a different way, to find out a miracle in it.

However, as the time passes, the consumer pulls the art down to the level of the masses. It is rather logical in the sense that art, as a part of culture, serves to self-identification and enculturation. But modern people, who live in a world, aimed at buying and selling, identify themselves rather restrictedly. Cinema, a relatively new form of art, gives evidence of that it in the best way.

Today cinema, which is the mirror of life, reflects and promotes consumption; for example, by placing brands into the plot. On the one hand, the reflection of consumption sprouts from the desire of director and the crew to depict life as it is. In this case, placing famous brands into a movie interior is natural and adds to the utmost realism of the motion picture. On the other hand, product-placement, which is the incorporation of a brand into a movie for commercial purposes, stimulates certain consumption patterns and purchasing decisions of the audience. Moreover, people coming to the movie theatres do not only identify themselves with what they consume, but they want to do so! For instance, Elaine, one of the focus group participants of the Denise E. Delorme and Leonard N. Reid (DeLorme, D. & Reid, L. 1999) research of “Moviegoers’ Experiences and Interpretations of Brands in Films Revisited”, state: …seeing brands in [it] validates my existence. I recognize it. Other people out there in the world use the same things that I do. Have the same stuff in their house. Wear the same things. So it kind of makes me feel like I'm like them or not like them.

Another interview participant, Zoe, notices: I think it really reflects something real basic about our culture that our main purpose is not to be human beings moved by a story and characters but rather to be urged to be consumers.

Thus, the art is on the bit of consumer and his or her values.

Summing up, the shift from mass production to mass consumption has influenced overall culture of modern society. The art, which is a visible artifact of culture, has undergone the shift from being exclusive to being popular and accessible. This move reflects the change in human values. Human values have become materialistic under the influence of economic changes in society. The aspiration to consume is the main engine of modern culture, and it will influence artifacts, rituals and behaviour of people in future.

References

1. Dagevos, H. (2005) Consumers as four-faced creatures. Looking at food consumption from the perspective of contemporary consumers: Research Report. Appetite, 45, 32–39

2. DeLorme, D. & Reid, L. (1999) Moviegoers' Experiences and Interpretations of Brands in Films Revisited. Journal of Advertising, Vol. XXVIII, No. 2, 71-95

3. Haviland William A. (1987) Cultural Anthropology (5th ed.). NY: CBS College Publishing.

4. Lakomski G. (2001) Organizational Change, Leadership and Learning: Culture as cognitive process. The International Journal of Educational Management. Vol. 15, No. 2, p. 70

5. McLean, F. (1997) Marketing the Museum. London and NY: Routledge.

6. www.azlyrics.com http://en.wikipedia.org/