McKendrick claimed that emulation was a key factor in “an unprecedented propensity to consume” that advanced in force during the course of the century. The emulation concept was not new and had first been introduced by Veblen. Simmel had also placed much emphasis on social competition being the grounds for the consumer revolution. Perkin also shared this view. He maintained that if consumer demand propelled the industrial revolution then social emulation was the driving force behind
consumer demand. The vast majority of people in Britain in the 18th century were earning enough disposable income and were now increasingly more inclined to spend it on ‘keeping up with the Joneses’ (Campbell, 1987) The fine divisions of social stratification meant that social mobility was somewhat fluid. This consequently gave people the incentive to work harder. This resulted in a greater increase in earnings and consequently consumption. People from all social classes spent more frantically than ever before trying to imitate and emulate the superior classes. The superior classes increasingly searched for novel and distinctive products which further perpetuated social emulation and highly competitive conditions. “Spurred on by class competition, men and women surrendered easily to the pursuit of novelty [and] the hypnotic effects of fashion” (McKendrick, 1982 p.11). This type of consumerism is what Veblen termed ‘conspicuous consumption’. However Veblen unlike McKendrick placed far more emphasis on the pursuit of leisure and suggested that the leisure class was the ideal class. ‘Conspicuous consumption’ causes luxuries to become perceived as necessities. The fluid social mobility of 18th century England coupled with increased levels in incomes caused the consumer revolution to flourish (McKendrick, 1982)
According to McKendrick London was the centre of the consumer revolution. Moreover its population increased so much that it became the largest European city. London’s’ capabilities for influencing consumerism were immense and spread out encompassing not only Britain but Europe as well. In addition McKendrick argues that commercialisation was a huge contributing factor in the consumer revolution of the 18th century. He claims that the development of more skilful and aggressive advertisements manipulated more people in to buying products and goods. He uses the examples of Josiah Wedgewood and George Packwood to illustrate his point. These two men both gained success through using advertising to manipulate and influence consumer behaviour (McKendrick, 1987). However, he also suggests that individuals have an inherent instinct which forces them to consume. This ‘latent want’ was previously repressed within individuals as a result of an insufficient supply of goods and services and also a lack of disposable income (Lee, 2000) McKendrick refers to “the latent demand [producers] were attempting to release” (Lee, 2000)
McKendrick’s work has been criticised by many for using research gathered from producers and traders. A key element in his work is the exploration of the demand component of the industrial revolution yet he neglects to obtain information from that very source. Thus his evidence is often viewed as inaccurate and unreliable placing limitations on any definite conclusions. McKendrick’s work has also been criticised for focusing only on 18th century England. Consequently much of the research in this area has arisen as a reaction to McKendrick’s work. For example Davis (2000) studied various consumer revolutions throughout China and Asia. Glickman’s (1999) work focused on consumer culture in the United States of America. Purdy’s (1998) objective was to apply McKendrick’s theory to German consumer society. Other studies have also looked at the issue of gender and consumerism (Fine, 2002)
Campbell however, discontented with the limits of Mckendrick’s explanation on emulation as a justification for the increase in consumption sought an alternative theory. Unlike McKendricks theory Campbell’s does not concentrate on the utilitarian character of consumption, but instead places much emphasis on its connection with pleasure. Campbell’s Romantic ethic occupies a distinctly different new ground when approaching the topic of consumption. Campbell’s work is modelled on Weber’s protestant ethic theory and is often described as offering a ‘mirror image’ account of the origins of modernity. Weber argued that religion played a vital role in determining the structure of society and in particular its economic condition. His work focused on a specific form of Protestantism known as Calvinism, as he believed that the practices of this religion to some extent shaped economic conditions and were a key function in the rise of capitalism in Western societies (Weber, 2001). The alternative theory proposed by Campbell focuses on the ‘flip-side’ of Weber’s work arguing that western development was the result of a romantic ethic which fostered a spirit of consumerism. However, Campbell’s objective is not to criticise or correct Weber but to propose that his theory in isolation is an insufficient explanation for the development of modern western societies. Where Weber describes there being a protestant work ethic there was also, according to Campbell, a corresponding romantic ethic that incites consumerism. (Campbell, 1987)
Unlike, previous attempts to analyse consumption Campbell did not adopt a utilitarian mode of thought to explain consumer behaviour. He instead favoured an approach which was produced using a hedonistic structure. Campbell argues that there are two distinct forms of hedonism-traditional and modern. The former model of hedonism is constructed on the concepts of ‘need’ and ‘satisfaction’. In this traditional model the hedonist is said to obtain feelings of gratification and pleasure sensations from cultural and social interactions. The central focus here then is the body and activities which act as bodily stimuli. Campbell suggests activities such as “eating, drinking, sexual intercourse, socialising, dancing and playing games are all acts which stimulate the body. (Campbell, 1987 p.69) Thus the traditional hedonist achieves pleasure and gratification through direct sensory touch. However, Campbell maintains that the traditional form of hedonism has evolved through time into a parallel form of hedonism which relies on imagined experiences and emotions. Thus pleasure is extracted from mental images and the management of emotions rather sensory tactile experiences. Campbell argues that ‘self-illusory’ hedonism is therefore the key to the spirit of modern consumerism. He maintains that romanticism is the primary driving force behind modern hedonism. The modern hedonist guided by the romantic ethic has the creative capacity to consume in an illusionary sense. However, the imagined mental consumption is inevitably always superior to the “real” material good thus producing an insatiable desire within the individual for more, which consequently propels modern consumerism. The result is a frustrating cycle in which real consumption is frequently ‘disillusioning’ and does not meet the expectations of the imagined experience.
LONGING
DISILLUSIONMENT CONSUMPTION
(Source: Campbell 1987)
Another account offered to explain the upsurge in consumption is urbanisation. The impact of consumption geographically speaking is typically located in urban areas.
A population explosion in the inner-towns as a result of the concentration of the labour force caused rapid urbanisation in these areas. The impact of consumerism is particularly apparent in the city of Glasgow. Once renowned as the production capital of the world it is now takes on the characteristics of a consumer orientated city dependent on demand rather supply. The city of Glasgow is a prime example of how gentrification can transform a city’s direction and alter its cultural and economic character. (Miles, 1998)
In conclusion, this essay has examined the issue of a consumer revolution in the 18th century. The paper discussed Mckendrick’s work and the industrial mass production thesis. It was shown that whilst Mckendrick highlights issues such as
commercialisation and the neglected study of the demand side of consumerism. He fails to expand his research and focuses only on 18th century England. Moreover it was shown that McKendricks work tends to centre on the utalitarian and honorific character of consumption and neglects any emotional involvement. It was also shown that former accounts have frequently highlighted the significance of novelty and social structure. However, this essay also detailed an alternative theory on consumption proposed by Campbell. Campbell’s work focuses on sentimentalism and the spirit of romanticism and offers a reverse view of Weber’s classic “ The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Finally this essay discussed the impact of urbanisation and its subsequent effect on the rise of consumerism.
Bibliography
Bocock, R. (1993) Key Ideas: Consumption, London: Routledge
Campbell, C (1987) The Romantic Ethic and the Spirit of Modern Consumerism,
Oxford: Basil Blackwell Incorporated
Clarke, D. B. (2003) The Consumer Society and the Postmodern City, London: Routledge
Fine, B (2002) The World of Consumption, London: Routledge
Lee, M. J. (2000) The Consumer Society Reader, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Limited
Lury, C (1996) Consumer Culture, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Limited
Miles, S (2000) Consumerism as a Way of Life London: Sage Publications Limited
Miller, D (1995) Acknowledging Consumption, London: Routledge
McCracken, G. (1990) Culture and Consumption, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press
McKendrick, N; Brewer, J. and Plumb, J. H. (1987) The Birth of a Consumer Society: The Commercialzation of Eighteenth-century England, London: Europa Publications Limited
Slater, D (1997) Consumer Culture and Modernity, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Limited
Veblen, T (1924) The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions,
London: Allen and Unwin
Weber, M. (2001) The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism
London: Taylor and Francis Books Limited