What Is Bauman's Theory Perpetuate Repressed?
INTRODUCTION
- Introduce main aspects to be discussed in essay (new divides caused by consumption)
MAIN BODY
1st Social Division: Bauman’s theory
- Introduce repressed (who, why)
- Introduce seduced (who, why)
- Counter argument (Bauman’s simplified theory)
2nd Social Division: zero-sum/positive-sum, Dennis Wrong
- The High Street (decline) against large retail parks (thriving)
- Zero-sum game (supermarket power for personal benefit) (Tescopoly Alliance)
- Positive-sum game (supermarket power for everyone’s benefit) (pro-supermarket lobby)
CONCLUSION
- exploring concepts covered in essay (relating them to other theories)
- consumption important defining factor in current society but not simple or equal
- society constantly making and repairing itself
Outline the claim that consumption creates new social divisions. …show more content…
Consumption is a defining factor in our current society; it both unites us and divides us in many ways. Through the claims and concepts brought to light by Bauman Zygmunt and Dennis Wrong I will attempt to shed light on these new divisions and use evidence to support this.
There are various social divisions based mainly on class and character that were observed in the past, some of these still remain but it is interesting to observe exactly what new divides consumption has created in recent times.
Bauman claims that consumption has created new social divisions, the seduced and the repressed. He believes we live in a society that relies on the ability to express one's status in the form of material goods and services, but the possibility that one has to access these is exactly what separates the two groups. Bauman refers to the seduced as those who, because of their financial and social circumstances, are more able to consume effectively, for example those with more disposable income. In recently collected data by the ONS we can see that an average household spends more on re-creation and luxuries than it does on essentials (Source: ONS, 2008), (Hetherington, 2009, p. 24). This shows that people are interested in shopping for luxury and therefore seduced into the trappings of a consumer lifestyle that, as Bauman states, creates belonging, acceptance and membership within
society.
But what about those excluded from these consumer services? Bauman defines the repressed as those who cannot participate in the everyday fripperies of the socially seduced. The unemployed and low-paid miss out simply by not having the financial resources to participate but there are also those who cannot participate due to mobility difficulties. This causes them to become physically excluded, a problem, which has arisen due to the lack of transport to the new retail outlets where the epitome of the seduction process takes place. Another group that is segregated are those with little or no access to a computer for example older people, those with mental illness or again those with little or no disposable income to spend on new technology. This group becomes socially excluded especially in this day and age where the Internet is one of consumer societies' most powerful weapons. As a whole the repressed become the ‘poor’ of the late industrial society, described as inadequate consumers, which leads to ‘social degradation’ or ‘internal exile’ (Bauman, cited in Best, 2005, p. 72).
Although Bauman’s concept seems quite adept at describing current society one could argue that it is not complex enough. His groups describe two simplified aspects of a divided society, who is to say we cannot fluctuate between them? Those who found themselves in the pre-recession years may have been in a better position to adhere to the seduced part of society, a few years later they may have found themselves leaning towards the repressed as the credit crunch took hold, “I think what we will see sort of subsequently is some shift back to a more unequal situation, perhaps, where fewer people could gain easy access to credit in the way that they had done over the last ten years.” (Audio-visual, Reflections on ‘Material Lives’, The Open University 2009). Bauman also forgets others such as environmentalist who may choose to not participate.
So far this essay has touched on a division caused by choice of what to consume based on our expression and self-identity but what about the divisions caused by the retail institutions themselves? A division is also caused by our choice of where to consume. An imbalance has formed, along with the rise of major retail stores and supermarkets, provoked by the immense power they have in influencing not just what we buy, but also where.
The high street has gone through some dramatic changes over the last few years; there has been a decline in customers therefore resulting in a decline in profit. A study carried out by geographer Peter Jackson (Jackson, 1998) in North London provided results explaining one of the possible reasons behind this. People in North London were asked to describe the experience of both retail parks and their typical high street. The new retail parks were seen as convenient, clean, safe, and regulated areas whereas the high street was described as disordered, dirty and unsafe. In other words the department stores were viewed in a positive manner in contrast to the high street where it seems the repressed are confined.
The lessening diversity of places to shop is also caused by the large supermarket chains. As our choice of product is expanding our choice of where to consume seems to be slowly diminishing. For example, the four big chains Tesco, Sainsbury's, Asda and Morrisons clash in the fight to gain control over the grocery market. Some may argue that their firm grip on the consumer market has encouraged the decline of independent retailers and smaller chains and that, through their immense buying and market power, they have been able to control the consumer sector and are now seen by some, as those who dictate a large part of production and sales. Certain members of the public have even grouped together to create a coalition against the market power of major UK supermarkets, calling themselves the Tescopoly Alliance. Their point of view is what sociologist Dennis Wrong defines as the zero-sum game. Technically speaking his definition is a mathematical representation of a participant's gain or loss in a situation. In this case the supermarket giants come out on top and the independent retailers struggle to survive.
Nonetheless not everyone agrees that this power struggle is a simple zero-sum economy. Some choose to describe it as a win-win game theory, in fact the pro-supermarket lobby insists they do not abuse their power but that they use it as a force for good, distributing wealth and gain in various areas, not only in the UK. Those who believe in this positive-sum game, claim that all parties involved benefit from this use of power. For example, the consumer gains from having a larger choice of product and the local economy gains from the regeneration of the area. Even local migrant workers and the workers abroad can gain; even though they are low-paid, 'bad jobs are better than no jobs' (John Allen, 2009, p. 90).
All the concepts and evidence we have explored provide different points of view. There is also an interesting aspect of irony that can be found such as the individuality that the seduced designate themselves with, is overcome by the homogeneity of the products on offer. One could look back to Bourdieu's theory of consumer formation where he claims that our choice is imposed and regulated, often by ourselves. On the other hand there are some similarities that follow on from previous concepts of social division such as Marx’s theory of class that placed those who had power over production in a position to control and impose over those who didn't (supermarket domination).
Overall consumption can define certain aspects of our current society but it is important to realize that it is not as simple as it may seem. There are lots of factors to take into account that cause an array of divisions such as those between able-bodied and disabled, young and old, and rich and poor. It is important to remember that society is in a constant moving state; in order to make and repair itself it must be fluid. Is a consumer society sustainable? That is a question that still remains unanswered but we can be sure that social scientists believe a consumer society is not an equal one and the inequalities can be defined by who is able or not able to consume.
WORD COUNT: 1,291
- Introduce main aspects to be discussed in essay (new divides caused by consumption)
MAIN BODY
1st Social Division: Bauman’s theory
- Introduce repressed (who, why)
- Introduce seduced (who, why)
- Counter argument (Bauman’s simplified theory)
2nd Social Division: zero-sum/positive-sum, Dennis Wrong
- The High Street (decline) against large retail parks (thriving)
- Zero-sum game (supermarket power for personal benefit) (Tescopoly Alliance)
- Positive-sum game (supermarket power for everyone’s benefit) (pro-supermarket lobby)
CONCLUSION
- exploring concepts covered in essay (relating them to other theories)
- consumption important defining factor in current society but not simple or equal
- society constantly making and repairing itself
Outline the claim that consumption creates new social divisions. …show more content…
Consumption is a defining factor in our current society; it both unites us and divides us in many ways. Through the claims and concepts brought to light by Bauman Zygmunt and Dennis Wrong I will attempt to shed light on these new divisions and use evidence to support this.
There are various social divisions based mainly on class and character that were observed in the past, some of these still remain but it is interesting to observe exactly what new divides consumption has created in recent times.
Bauman claims that consumption has created new social divisions, the seduced and the repressed. He believes we live in a society that relies on the ability to express one's status in the form of material goods and services, but the possibility that one has to access these is exactly what separates the two groups. Bauman refers to the seduced as those who, because of their financial and social circumstances, are more able to consume effectively, for example those with more disposable income. In recently collected data by the ONS we can see that an average household spends more on re-creation and luxuries than it does on essentials (Source: ONS, 2008), (Hetherington, 2009, p. 24). This shows that people are interested in shopping for luxury and therefore seduced into the trappings of a consumer lifestyle that, as Bauman states, creates belonging, acceptance and membership within
society.
But what about those excluded from these consumer services? Bauman defines the repressed as those who cannot participate in the everyday fripperies of the socially seduced. The unemployed and low-paid miss out simply by not having the financial resources to participate but there are also those who cannot participate due to mobility difficulties. This causes them to become physically excluded, a problem, which has arisen due to the lack of transport to the new retail outlets where the epitome of the seduction process takes place. Another group that is segregated are those with little or no access to a computer for example older people, those with mental illness or again those with little or no disposable income to spend on new technology. This group becomes socially excluded especially in this day and age where the Internet is one of consumer societies' most powerful weapons. As a whole the repressed become the ‘poor’ of the late industrial society, described as inadequate consumers, which leads to ‘social degradation’ or ‘internal exile’ (Bauman, cited in Best, 2005, p. 72).
Although Bauman’s concept seems quite adept at describing current society one could argue that it is not complex enough. His groups describe two simplified aspects of a divided society, who is to say we cannot fluctuate between them? Those who found themselves in the pre-recession years may have been in a better position to adhere to the seduced part of society, a few years later they may have found themselves leaning towards the repressed as the credit crunch took hold, “I think what we will see sort of subsequently is some shift back to a more unequal situation, perhaps, where fewer people could gain easy access to credit in the way that they had done over the last ten years.” (Audio-visual, Reflections on ‘Material Lives’, The Open University 2009). Bauman also forgets others such as environmentalist who may choose to not participate.
So far this essay has touched on a division caused by choice of what to consume based on our expression and self-identity but what about the divisions caused by the retail institutions themselves? A division is also caused by our choice of where to consume. An imbalance has formed, along with the rise of major retail stores and supermarkets, provoked by the immense power they have in influencing not just what we buy, but also where.
The high street has gone through some dramatic changes over the last few years; there has been a decline in customers therefore resulting in a decline in profit. A study carried out by geographer Peter Jackson (Jackson, 1998) in North London provided results explaining one of the possible reasons behind this. People in North London were asked to describe the experience of both retail parks and their typical high street. The new retail parks were seen as convenient, clean, safe, and regulated areas whereas the high street was described as disordered, dirty and unsafe. In other words the department stores were viewed in a positive manner in contrast to the high street where it seems the repressed are confined.
The lessening diversity of places to shop is also caused by the large supermarket chains. As our choice of product is expanding our choice of where to consume seems to be slowly diminishing. For example, the four big chains Tesco, Sainsbury's, Asda and Morrisons clash in the fight to gain control over the grocery market. Some may argue that their firm grip on the consumer market has encouraged the decline of independent retailers and smaller chains and that, through their immense buying and market power, they have been able to control the consumer sector and are now seen by some, as those who dictate a large part of production and sales. Certain members of the public have even grouped together to create a coalition against the market power of major UK supermarkets, calling themselves the Tescopoly Alliance. Their point of view is what sociologist Dennis Wrong defines as the zero-sum game. Technically speaking his definition is a mathematical representation of a participant's gain or loss in a situation. In this case the supermarket giants come out on top and the independent retailers struggle to survive.
Nonetheless not everyone agrees that this power struggle is a simple zero-sum economy. Some choose to describe it as a win-win game theory, in fact the pro-supermarket lobby insists they do not abuse their power but that they use it as a force for good, distributing wealth and gain in various areas, not only in the UK. Those who believe in this positive-sum game, claim that all parties involved benefit from this use of power. For example, the consumer gains from having a larger choice of product and the local economy gains from the regeneration of the area. Even local migrant workers and the workers abroad can gain; even though they are low-paid, 'bad jobs are better than no jobs' (John Allen, 2009, p. 90).
All the concepts and evidence we have explored provide different points of view. There is also an interesting aspect of irony that can be found such as the individuality that the seduced designate themselves with, is overcome by the homogeneity of the products on offer. One could look back to Bourdieu's theory of consumer formation where he claims that our choice is imposed and regulated, often by ourselves. On the other hand there are some similarities that follow on from previous concepts of social division such as Marx’s theory of class that placed those who had power over production in a position to control and impose over those who didn't (supermarket domination).
Overall consumption can define certain aspects of our current society but it is important to realize that it is not as simple as it may seem. There are lots of factors to take into account that cause an array of divisions such as those between able-bodied and disabled, young and old, and rich and poor. It is important to remember that society is in a constant moving state; in order to make and repair itself it must be fluid. Is a consumer society sustainable? That is a question that still remains unanswered but we can be sure that social scientists believe a consumer society is not an equal one and the inequalities can be defined by who is able or not able to consume.
WORD COUNT: 1,291