Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

lurkette · 03-28-2007, 10:10 AM

Fuck, I crafted a very well-worded answer to this and accidentally hit the "back" button. I don't have time to recreate it. This'll teach me to be concise.

Bottom line: humans are inherently symbol-using creatures. It is in our nature to imbue objects with symbolic value beyond their use value. This has gotten way out of hand, IMHO (for example, that godawful ugly $45K Louis Vuitton purse), but I don't think there's any way to completely opt out. The interpretation of expression happens on the other side of the conversation, so whether you're intending to express yourself through your possessions or not, they are seen as expressions of yourself by some (most) people. To some extent, irony is an effective way to shift the conversation incrementally: using the cast off symbols of past value to create new value, thereby commenting on the absurdity of the process. Unfortunately, some people don't get the joke and take it seriously. This is why people wear stupid trucker hats.

Even if we were to revert (evolve?) to a completely agrarian, egalitarian socialist society, our penchant for symbol use would almost certainly mean that some items would be seen as expressions of the self. Look at some tribes where fetishes or totems were first used to identify roles but gradually evolved into status symbols. Or someone finds a pretty rock, everyone wants the pretty rock. Suddenly it's not a "rock" anymore, it's a commodity, and possession of the rock is suddenly a symbol of something beyond having a hard piece of silica with which to bash things.

Buying things exclusively for their use value is a good start to ending the unsustainable consumerism that's depleting our natural resources, but you're never going to eradicate commodity fetishism, particularly when people have leisure time and disposable income. Unless someone has some good ideas. You might try pointing out the negative environmental and economic consequences of overconsumption and hope that the use value of an imagined sustainable future is greater than the symbolic value of whatever commodity a person is considering purchasing, but instant gratification packs a wallop over that bird in the bush.

03-28-2007, 10:10 AM	#5 (permalink)
lurkette My future is coming on Moderator Emeritus Location: east of the sun and west of the moon	Fuck, I crafted a very well-worded answer to this and accidentally hit the "back" button. I don't have time to recreate it. This'll teach me to be concise. Bottom line: humans are inherently symbol-using creatures. It is in our nature to imbue objects with symbolic value beyond their use value. This has gotten way out of hand, IMHO (for example, that godawful ugly $45K Louis Vuitton purse), but I don't think there's any way to completely opt out. The interpretation of expression happens on the other side of the conversation, so whether you're intending to express yourself through your possessions or not, they are seen as expressions of yourself by some (most) people. To some extent, irony is an effective way to shift the conversation incrementally: using the cast off symbols of past value to create new value, thereby commenting on the absurdity of the process. Unfortunately, some people don't get the joke and take it seriously. This is why people wear stupid trucker hats. Even if we were to revert (evolve?) to a completely agrarian, egalitarian socialist society, our penchant for symbol use would almost certainly mean that some items would be seen as expressions of the self. Look at some tribes where fetishes or totems were first used to identify roles but gradually evolved into status symbols. Or someone finds a pretty rock, everyone wants the pretty rock. Suddenly it's not a "rock" anymore, it's a commodity, and possession of the rock is suddenly a symbol of something beyond having a hard piece of silica with which to bash things. Buying things exclusively for their use value is a good start to ending the unsustainable consumerism that's depleting our natural resources, but you're never going to eradicate commodity fetishism, particularly when people have leisure time and disposable income. Unless someone has some good ideas. You might try pointing out the negative environmental and economic consequences of overconsumption and hope that the use value of an imagined sustainable future is greater than the symbolic value of whatever commodity a person is considering purchasing, but instant gratification packs a wallop over that bird in the bush. __________________ "If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing." - Anatole France