Entry 3: Respond to "Setting the Course"

Quote: "The personal and social use of goods was complex and often quite expressive and participatory. In the generation after 1900, consumption had became a substitute for conversation in a society where rituals of communication were already weak and growing weaker" (3). This is sort of a reminder of how material things help to define who you are. I never thought of these things as being a substitute for conversation. I find this debatable because I think choosing to buy certain things can keep things interesting. Possessions have always been extensions of who people are. I think what the author is getting at with this article is that possessions have become commercialized in the past century, and how people are tricked into buying things in order to make a personal statement about themselves. I can agree with that point. I don't think of possessions as a replacement for communication, but I do think it makes for a more competitive environment in our society.

"The growth of the consumer society coincided with the decline of self-sufficiency, neighborliness, and family interactions. It replaced the traditional social roles and identities with those purchased in the market" (5). I believe that these statements are central to the argument of the entire piece. It summarizes the effect of consumerism on American society which Cross later backs up with examples such as the automobile and advertising. It seems to me that the most profound examples that Cross uses are the ones associated with advertising geared toward women. The practices of the advertising companies in the mid twentieth century completely altered what women bought, how they thought about themselves, and how many homemakers ran their homes, which in turn altered how parents raised their children. The consequences of such a huge explosion of consumer culture will continue to be seen as consumerism only continues to grow in importance to America's culture.

“the key point is that through goods and services, American found a way to understand themselves, others, the past, and the future…For good or ill, the consumerist system created meaning for Americans far more effectively than politics and civil society” ( Cross 5)
For me this quote summed up the overall message of this chapter. The reason that was behind why consumerism was able to rise so quickly in the early 1900s is because buying and having objects is the best way for people to help define their identity. Cross wrote that what someone consumes becomes a substitute for conversation. Instead of someone telling someone that they are Christian, middle class, and believe in helping the environment, they can just wear a cross necklace, have on gap jeans, and drive a prius. It saves people a lot of time and effort to explain every aspect of their selves to someone else. For people, expressing who they are to the world is extremely important. I believe this concept helps explain some of the facebook craze. By looking at someone’s facebook page you pick up a lot of who a person is. The viewer can see what type of music the person likes, which says something about the person. Also they can see how many “friends” the person has which expresses another aspect about the person. Every detail of a person’s page tells another part of the story of who a person is. However this profile identity is not random but is purposefully constructed. People are thinking about their choices and what sort of person they want to look like to the viewer of their page. This connection of identity with facebook might help explain the obsession that people have with facebook as they strive to let the world know who they are.

"Consumer goods were liberating in ways that other expressions of self and society were not. Unlike racial or even class characteristics, cars and foods as well as hats and clothes could be put on and taken off, depending on social and psychological circumstances." I have never thought about the development of consumer history in America in this way. Building on the idea that America is a "classless society" with mobility largely possible for everyone, consumer goods took on the role of aiding this ideal. It is very interesting that the choice and use of certain products and brands from a very early time to the present have been able to transform the way people think about themselves and the role they can fit in. Usually I only think of consuming and capitalism in monetary terms, but this article goes deeper into the personal,and psychological lasting impacts the "culture of spending" had on America in the 1900s.

"Despite the demands of studying and long lists of college regulations, student life was organized around a peer culture. One Midwestern university observer noted, 'failure in studies is not as important to college students as a failure in social adjustment.' The 'real work' of American collegians in the 1920's was responding positively to fads in dress, speech, music and dance."

This statement intrigues me because it really grasps the feeling of a dilemma that I feel like I have been dealing with through college so far; the choice between social life and studies. It's interesting to think about the effects of consumerism on my life as a student in particular. Social life does seem to be highly dependent on certain material items like clothing, music, food, drinks and even substances. I think the author had a good point in mentioning the influence of consumption and advertising on the younger American generations. They certainly seem to have had definitive effects not only on individual people, like Chris mentioned, but whole peer groups and even generations.

"The personality on the label was a bridge from manufacturer to customer, replacing the old personal relationship between storekeeper and shopper. In an increasingly mobile society, customers were more likely to know 'Sunny Jim' or 'Betty Crocker' than the clerk behind the counter. There were symbols of reliability and security in a society where people could no longer count on personal trust in the retailer." (8-9)

I think this an excellent example of a changing consumer society. I have always thought of these personalities as simply a way of marketing, but the author brings to light the motivation of manufacturers. In a developing consumer and less personal society, customers still wanted a personal relationship with the manufacturer from whom they buy products to ensure that they consistently purchased good-quality items. By using a perceived friendly and trustworthy personality, advertisers sought brand loyalty, and in turn, more business.

“There was, of course, a dark side to consumerism. If consumer culture leveled social differences and gave individuals the freedom to define themselves, it also reflected an American society divided by class and burdened by its “hidden injuries”. Shopping sometimes was a defensive reaction to insults from the class above or an offensive response to the intrusion of the classes below. Housing and their furnishings allowed some people to join the group while giving others a way to exclude the “unworthy.” Consumption became a means of waging class war...” (4).
This quote explains consumerism in the 19th century, but I feel it also describes the present. Higher class citizens are able to own expensive, ostentatious items, while lower class citizens cannot. Subconsciously, most of us are at “war”, competing with each other to own the top of the line, more luxurious items. Wealthy people do not associate with the less fortunate if they have a choice. Wealthy appearance brings about better service. The elite may or may not look down upon the lower classes, either way, those citizens want to attain as much as they can to mask their low income identity. One way to do so is by owning the trendiest, most expensive items associated with the rich and famous. This helps establish one’s identity. This is a great quote which explains the negative aspects of consumerism.

Gary Cross states, “Prosperity meant a shift from purely utilitarian to symbolic goods. Fashionable furnishings, packaged products, domestic appliances, and cars expressed new versions of self and community, new understanding of past and future. Through their packaging, display, and advertising, consumer goods came to embody a distinct and eventually dominant alternative to political and even religious visions of American life” (2). The significant transformation in consumerism in the twentieth century completely altered the American mindset on product consumption by allowing products to direct the identity of the individual as well as the society. This period of consumer revolution is what initiated the relatively luxurious standard of living in the United States, which is an extremely influential aspect of the lifestyle that Americans currently engage in. The concept that all the materials that individuals in America’s present day society consider fundamental were not necessary prior to the twentieth century reveals how dependent American society is upon the circulation of consumer goods. Newer, nicer products did indeed go from “purely utilitarian to symbolic goods” (2). Cross conveys the message that the purchase of such lavish items demonstrates a surplus of funds, which reflects an individual’s socioeconomic status in the community, a notion that he believes has eventually come to govern the American way of life. It is difficult to refute this idea when advertisements are integrated into almost all aspects of everyday routine such as watching television, surfing the Internet, or driving to work.

"'Members of each stratum accept as their ideal of decency the scheme of life in vogue in the next higher stratum.'" (4)

I picked this quote because I thought it rang especially true when observing present day society and its spending habits. Although America technically does not have a class system, people do attain a different "status" according to the material wealth they own. However, because there is supposedly upward mobility in our society, people are always hungry for the next best thing that will also, supposedly, elevate them to a higher level and companies are all too happy to give it to them.

American consumer culture was built on much more than new prducts. At least as important were innovations in selling - new approaches to retailing, buying on credit, packaging, and advertising.

Its not really new to me, but it is nice to reaffirm the how America does well in innovation. Its easy to see why we think so highly of ourselves. The way we do the things explained in the quote is a very modern way of doing things. Not only did we create new products for the rest of the world, we kept thinking of the future steps to stay ahead of the competition. I do not think it is debatable because United States was the richest country in the world due to its innovations. I think this piece helps the authors thesis which is that new products in this era brought in a new way of life.

Quote: "In the 1860s, department stores had learned how to encourage spending by allowing anyone to enter their retail floors and even to handle merchandise, offered at fixed prices."(pg.7)

Bartering is a concept that can be argued as nonexistent in the American Consumer society. A price tag attached to an item an individual desires to purchase is final, requiring the exact transaction of money for the good. This provides the consumer an assurance that his purchase will be fast and require little hassle regarding a price compromise. This promotes a willingness to purchase as an environment of eased trade can be upheld. The passage listed above allowed me to consider the possibility that bartering was not solely deleted to aid the consumer achieve all its materialistic needs, rather as a tactic used by producers to promote larger sales. The dialogue between clerk and buyer has been deleted and replaced by supply and demand. This article shows that supply is supplied by producers and that demand has become instilled upon the buyer through advertisement campaigns and tactics such as the omission of bartering.

Quote: “As important, consumer goods were liberating in ways that other expressions of self and society were not. Unlike racial or even class characteristics, cars and foods as well as hats and clothes could be put on and taken off, depending on social and psychological circumstances.”
It is interesting to think as the author mentioned previously that slowly consumerism had started to emerge as a replacement for communication. However I have to disagree with him because I do not feel like material items replaced simple forms of communications but rather enhanced it. Consumer goods made it so that some things did not need to be said, and that also the quality of the goods helped to dictate the general flow of the conversation. For example if someone was speaking to another with a more bargain brand car, then the first person would have the modesty to not flaunt their luxuries as to not make them feel bad. Consumer goods is another aspect that is used to enhance the self and society, but not to entirely replace it as the author is implying.

"It was not the sheer quantity of goods or even their utility that enabled consumerism to win the century. As important were the social and psychological meanings of commodities, created by the magic of modern retailing environments, packaging, and promotion."
We are trained to believe that consuming makes us happy. The quote suggests that the actual product often doesn't matter. Modern advertising makes us believe that we can buy happiness.

"The advertiser's job went beyond announcing products and prices to persuade consumers of the nutritional value of canned soup and the hygienic virtues of tooth brushing (with a specific kind of toothpaste)." (10)

I chose this quote because it reminds me of the things being discussed in my psychology class, social influences. We are currently talking about how attitudes are formed by the positive or negative information associated with a certain object. There are three different types of information given by advertisements. Affective information is the feelings and emotions aroused by an object. Cognitive information is the beliefs and facts about an object. Behavioral information suggests past, present, or future actions towards an object. It seems that much of the information given in twentieth century advertising was affective information. Advertisers tried to convince consumers that they would get a specific feeling when purchasing their product. This also relates to the quote about a certain food not only being good for breakfast but would make the mom a better mother for making the purchase. Advertisers were very good at using this information to manipulate consumers.

"Twentieth-century Americans discarded frontier values - Lincoln's old idea of the democracy of labor and property - and often replaced them with the new dream of display and consumption: the "democratization of desire," self-satisfaction in the attainment of more and more things.

I think this quote marks an important shift which took place in American society and culture. I think it is true, that the acquisition of material goods in high numbers became an indicator of status and success in America. A person became considered successful based on how many things he/she owned. Were they the newest innovations? Were the the best, or name-brand? Having the newest, best, and most material possessions replaced 'hard-work' as a marker of respect and social status. Quite to the contrary, as was discussed in the article, American companies raised incentives for workers through shorter work days, higher wages and mechanized work. Hard-work seemed an illusion of the past. While I agree that this contradicts the Lincoln-era democracy of labor and property in most aspects, I believe that this democracy still existed/exists but in an altered form. Labor still enabled the possibility of gaining property, however, the pool of people who were able to consume material goods widened. I believe that this is still democratic in it's own way.

"The Italian peasant or country black could avoid some humiliation and establish an identity with a new suit of fashionable clothes and new products as easy to find as canned soups or the movies... Increasingly more fragmented, mobile, and unorganized, Americans joined "consumption communities" that did not require an active citizenry but were compromised, according to historian Daniel Boorstin, of "people who have a feeling of shared well-being, shared risks, common interests and common concerns that come from consuming the same kinds of objects." (p.2&3)

I had always realized that things are important to people, but before reading this I never really realized the power that consumables held for the individual. They allowed people like immigrants, people among different classes or even just people in general, to fit into the majority and feel like they belonged. Products became readily available to the vast majority and allowed people who had not felt like they did not belong to buy these clothes, appliances, etc. with easily conform to the new "American culture." Mass produced products created stability and familiarity not only with the products themselves, but also with the people that purchased them by creating a kind of collective consciousness. Though, at the same time these products completely changed the outlooks, attitudes and goals of society and the "collective consciousness" that was created was drastically different from ideals previous to the age of consumerism. I think these quotes were very important to his arguments summing up that consumables did not only help to shape American society historically, but also basically run our lives.

"The Italian peasant or country black could avoid some humiliation and establish an identity with a new suit of fashionable clothes and new products as easy to find as canned soups or the movies... Increasingly more fragmented, mobile, and unorganized, Americans joined "consumption communities" that did not require an active citizenry but were compromised, according to historian Daniel Boorstin, of "people who have a feeling of shared well-being, shared risks, common interests and common concerns that come from consuming the same kinds of objects." (p.2&3)

I had always realized that things are important to people, but before reading this I never really realized the power that consumables held for the individual. They allowed people like immigrants, people among different classes or even just people in general, to fit into the majority and feel like they belonged. Products became readily available to the vast majority and allowed people who had not felt like they belonged to buy these clothes, appliances, etc. and easily conform to the new "American culture." Mass produced products created stability and familiarity not only among the products themselves, but also among the people that purchased them by creating a kind of collective consciousness. Though, at the same time these products completely changed the outlooks, attitudes and goals of society, and the "collective consciousness" that was created was drastically different from ideals previous to the age of consumerism. I think these quotes were very important to his arguments, summing up that consumables did not only help to shape American society historically, but also basically run our lives.

"Twentieth-century Americans discarded frontier values -- Lincoln's old idea of the democracy of labor and property -- and often replaced them with the new dream of display and consumption: the 'democratization of desire,' self-satisfaction in the attainment of more and more things" (3). I feel that this quote really relates to the movie we saw on Wednesday, "Century of the Self", in that consumers bought products based on how it made one feel or to elevate their social status. Moreover, I believe that the consumers perpetuated Lincoln's ideas of rewarding themselves for working hard. They could satisfy their desires because they were prosperous. This is an important argument for the article because it suggests that everyone can achieve self-satisfaction with drive and perseverance to succeed.

“As important, consumer goods were liberating in ways that other expressions of self and society were not. Unlike racial or even class characteristics, cars and foods as well as hats and clothes could be put on and taken off, depending on social and psychological circumstances.” (3.)

I picked this quote because it speaks about something that I think is still very true about society today. The author refers to material goods as “characteristics” that are as important a part of our identity as our class and race. This is certainly true in society today. People define themselves in terms of their possessions- or what they can afford to possess. Cross speaks about characteristics individuals can “put on and take(n) off, depending on social and psychological circumstances” (Cross, 3). We use material goods to show the world different sides of ourselves. We proudly don trendy tote bags to the grocery store and glare at others who use liter producing plastic bags, fill ours with organic, locally grown goods, and then load them into our hummer. In the 1900s the consumption of goods served not only the purpose of fulfilling material wants and needs, but psychological ones as well. Buying material goods became a way of fitting into different social groups and remaining a part of the majority. Today it continues to fulfill psychological needs, such as resolving cognitive dissonance around issues like environmental consciousness. I agree with the perspective of the author and I think it is important to the argument of the piece. It is a good example of the multitude of forces that drive our consumer society.

“Clothes and cosmetics helped immigrant women define themselves as ‘American’ and enabled them to compete in the dating game. Similarly, African American cosmetics (especially skin whiteners and hair straighteners) were advertised as ‘glorifying our womanhood,’ giving dignity of sorts to women stereotyped with racial and rural images. Cosmetics allowed females of all races and backgrounds to ‘put on’ a personality…Makeup allowed the ‘new woman’ to assume innovative, diverse, and multiple images…” (41-42).

This section was very interesting to me because I had no idea cosmetics and clothing were advertised as “glorifying our womanhood.” To be honest, I think this is a little on the extreme side because I do not think a woman is exalted by what brand she is wearing or what make-up covers her flaws, and it should not be this way. On the other hand, the new consumer good might have been a helpful tool for the immigrants in the country to assimilate into North American culture. Cross says earlier in the piece an immigrant would save themselves some embarrassment by knowing what was fashionable to wear or not, and what the new products were out on the market, since at the time, a person’s status was defined by how much they had and not because of who they really were. I think that is somewhat acceptable to say, however, immigrant women were getting the wrong idea, at least in my opinion.

"In 1905, when the mean annual income was $450 a typical car cost from $600-$7,500. It was the rich man's toy. Used for show by the likes of William Vanderbilt who kept a 100 car garage on Long Island." I was surprised when reading this article that a typical car cost so much money during this time. Today you could get a car for the same price, even though the annual income has gone up about 70 times. Since the cheapest car you could buy was well more than the annual income, it would be the equivalent of purchasing the cheapest car for around $60,000 today. Now everyone has a car and it is difficult to perform without one. Technology has improved to bring down the price of the car and the roads make traveling by car much more accessible.

"The opportunity for 'automobility' with the family car added another dimension to the liberation of middle-class youths. Now these young people could use the parental house as a dormitory... The teenage couple escaped the front parlor for the privacy of the automobile, movie theater, or dance hall" (13).

Cross touches upon an intriguing concept. The consuemerization of the date. Instead of a couple meeting within the home of one partner's parents, they were able to leave the house. This created a need for activity outside the home. In 1930s America, when the automobile was popularized, parents would not accept their children going out without an acceptable activity. If teenagers were left unsupervised this could lead to pre-marital sexual activities which were, and in many households still are, frowned upon. Therefore, movie theaters and dance halls began advertising themselves to parents as a safe place for a date night and to teenagers as an escape from the watchful eye of their parents. Throughout the century the importance of creative dates has grown. Now on television and in movies, the most romantic dates, the ones you want to go on, are usually the most expensive dates. This also creates a class hierarchy of dating. Those with the most money can be the most "romantic" and therefore are most likely to find a mate. Social Darwinism at work.

But ads also gave meaning to consumption, showing how products could be used to shape personal identity and social relationship(9).
Both advertisers and their critics agreed that consumers were passive and that the function of ads was to manipulate rather than to inform(34).

First, ads were used as a way of selling goods. Then, ads started manipulating buyers, which means that ads got more important. I'm interest in the actual value of ads. And, I'm wondering what happens to ads in the future. Will ads get more important or less important?

"Both advertisers and their critics agreed that consumers (especially women) were passive and that the function of ads was to manipulate rather to inform. The insecure reader found what happened to the business people who didn't use mouthwash or disinfectant. One advertiser insisted that his typical reader had the 'mind of a child of ten.' This approach presumed that women and children were susceptible to emotional appeals and to manipulation. (Cross, p. 35)

The quote touches on the significance of advertising to consumerism. Advertising was directed to women and children. The advertising used appealed to women and children through emotions, more so negative emotions. The consumers were also tricked into believing that if they didn't have these items they would not be normal. This created a higher standard of living that not everyone could live up to. This quote is significantly important because you can still see to this day that women are the main target in advertising.

"Ads also gave meaning to consumption, showing how products could be used to shape personal identity and social relationships." This idea relates to the video we watched in class with the cigarette campaign for females. Advertisements created a very specific ideal-one of freedom and power for females, in order to sell the product. This process shaped the personal identity of females looking to challenge the status-quo and who desired to stand as strong, independent women.

I came across this topic on a different site and didn't really understand it, but this post explains it better. Appreciate it!

Super Blog, one of the best I goto. Great post Btw. Thanks for the look.

why don't web site moderators delete trash comments? There are some headlines web pages I surf to that enable comments; the comments are so full with trolls and crap, I do not make an effort perusing the comments. If you please delete the trash. Not one person will miss it; also slice out the tangents some folks participate in.

I agree with the OP, I believe it's 1.

There is no denying that Dress Barn is a nice place to go shopping.

Purchase Higher quality adjustable shoe lifts at the markdown price of only $17.99

Do you really want celeb news? Dislike it? Do you take very long lunches from your job when you're conscious that the latest issue of People will hit the newstands? I would like to find the number of everyone actually find celebrity gossip exciting, and ways in which many merely consider the fixation in it plain silly.

Superstars get anything provided to them so easily however they dont think about the folks who are out here under pressure, people today getting wiped out evicted arrested despite the fact that they were given the world in they hand but i reckon that people dont always fight for a a lot better tomorrow where i live at a tomorrow isnt always assured . And their toddlers buy it so god damn effortless and continually ungrateful man i'd personally KILL for advantage.

Do you really take great delight in hollywood news? Hate it? Do you really take long lunches from labor when you are aware your trendy issue of People hits the newstands? I want to be aware the amount of everyone actually find celeb news exciting, and in what way many truly consider the preoccupation with it laughable.

I'm a fair ­instance of a conventional young lady,I enjoy food items and adult males and a level of comfort. It is only that sooner or later, the non stop prattle of fashion has fast become a yell into my head. I could not disregard the idiocies any more,I go past a store that sell 6in heels and I'm frustrated,Banana ­Republic? ­Indignant for a second time, Selfridges is actually ­loathsome "I shop therefore I am" campaigns, a manifesto for idiots? Should not even go there. I've had it because of this tyrant idiot casting darts from every billboard and paper and Television screen.I want to cast a spear back.

I do believe Obama is most likely wasting his time refuting Ahmadinejad for the reason that a number of American’s happen to be lumping Ahmadinejad jointly under the same kind with Obama—though if The president shall be trusted, and who knows in this case, Perhaps right here is one instance whereby Barak doesn't necessarily blame Bush.

Intense? Lindsay Lohan wouldn't know the half it. I can recommend for her a business referred to as Palmer Drug use Program. They should be able to support her.

Stupid can be as stupid does...this event can be described as joke. Lindsay Lohan is going onto do substances purely because this lady won’t "get it"...The complete legal system is a joke. Perhaps you should put the girl in some gaol in Cincinnati or someplace else in Ohio where there is no overcrowding then there is no daft system that on a regular basis lets these people get away with ****. At least if the lady is going to keep going to do drugs she has to be "smart and practical" about it not get arrested...or else, carry on with what you are doing Lindsay and let us drop you in Afghanistan with truly daring soldiers who sadly are losing their lives day-after-day to give you your foolish so-called "independence".

Gold serves as more famous but silver is truly becoming more scarce in comparison to gold.

Hi.Cool, there is actually some good points on here some of my readers will maybe find this relevant, will send a link, many thanks.

Lindsay Lohan is just not going to any place that might hold her from filming, so yet again, I call Baloney with this sincere intensive inpatient rehabilitation tripe. There isn't any way the girl or her mommy will miss out on this chance to make bucks. And needless to say she won’t hate that scram bracelet good enough to stop the jack and coke and let go stuffing sh*t up her sordid nose.

Whenever I am purchasing I'm thinking about having sex, therefore when I'm making love I am considering purchasing.

I hate becoming therefore judgmental, but Sibling spouses is throwing creepy

Lindsay Lohan “These were my education years … but they were inside of the public eye. I came to be uncaring. I am experimenting. I was doing some things that folks do ten times added of when they’re in university or college.”

Today, Rush set up segments of Barack obama and Hillary and various Dems and then also played movies from Ahmadinejad’s spiel and pointed out that they mutually say the same things when ever raving about United states of america and capitalism.

Rick Sanchez purged i'd sure imagine that com-cast can wise up & shed maddcow ,Olberman,Schultz & Matthews from their media reports, I've got a long list from which to choose

Lindsay Lohan “If perhaps I were the alcoholic people says I'm, then having a [scram[]|] bracelet on may have ended me up in detox, in the emergency room, because I'd have had to come down from all the things that others say I sure am taking plus my father declares I’m taking – so that says something, mainly because I'm fine.”

There is a terror alert for Americans traveling in The european countries. Sadly the joke’s on you, terrorists – we are not able to afford to travel to The european countries!

I stop at the house to learn that Rick Sanchez eventually got dismissed from CNN. Hmm. Really, I seen that coming.

A bomb planted from a car or truck has erupted outside a retail complex in Londonderry, creating major destruction of town shops, authorities have said. Who needs Muslims?