‘INDIVIDUALISM’ and ‘RAMPANT CONSUMPTION’

consumption by its very nature bolsters a self-centred individualism which is the basis for stable and secure identities

Strinati (238)

Slavoj Zizek: Postmodernism and Consumption

It may be possible to identify the extent to which our economic experience is now characterised by what we buy (consumption) than what we make (production). Think for example, about the the extent to which the UK and much of Western Europe has shifted from manufacturing economies to consuming economies – ie we are structured around consuming things more than making things.

In other words, there is an argument that postmodern culture is a consumer culture, where the emphasis on style eclipses the emphasis on utility or need. So that ultimately there is no real value to postmodern culture other than the need for consumption. If this is the case, then it is possible to link postmodernist cultural expression with broader shifts in society, specifically around economics and politics.

Another characteristic of POSTMODERNISM is the creation, development and concentration of high consumption, with a displacement of both consumption and production that has radically altered the nature of societies and individuals living in them.

This approach in terms of postmodernism is associated with Fredric Jameson‘s 1984 essay, and subsequently 1991 book; Postmodernism, or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism which located postmodern culture (for example, music videos) in the expression of a new phase of capitalism, one which was aggressively consumerist, rampantly commodifying all of society as potential new markets for INDIVIDUALISED, ISOLATED, PERSONAL PLEASURE AND GAIN.

Think, for example, about new communications technologies, such as mobile telephony, which has created new (digital) worlds connected across time and space in ways which were completely unimaginable to previous generations. Often these are acts of individualised and personal consumption, where we are more likely to consume what we want, when we want, where we want and how we want.

But are the consequences of such a world?

The desire to consume just for the sake of consumption (ie there is no real need to consume more) creates a society that focusses on surface and/or style over substance and cannot see the consequences of mass consumption.

Another way to understand this approach is to reflect on the emergence of, often off-shore, leisure and theme parks which are ‘highly commercialised, with many simulated environments more ‘real’ than the original from which they are copied’ (Urry 2014:81).

Illustrating this point with references to ‘newly constructed sites of consumption excess’ (79) Urry highlights Macao described as ‘a laboratory of consumption, as the Chinese learn to be individualised consumers of goods and services being generated on an extraordinary scale’ (81). Or Dubai, which up to 1960 was one of the poorest places on earth and yet by the 2000’s was the number one global site for ostentatious shopping’ and other forms of hyppereal consumption – a domed ski resort, and copies of the ‘real’ more perfect than the originals – the pyramids, Taj Mahal, Hanging Gardens of Babylon, a snow mountain etc. .

The shifts in modern society from an economic perspective – ie the ‘financialisation’ of the modern world are explored in John Urry’s book, Offshoring (2014).