Veblen, Bourdieu, and Conspicuous Consumption Author(s): Andrew B. Trigg Reviewed work(s): Source: Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. 35, No. 1 (Mar., 2001), pp. 99-115 Published by: Association for Evolutionary Economics Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4227638 . Accessed: 25/02/2012 19:56 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Association for Evolutionary Economics is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Economic Issues. http://www.jstor.org JeI JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ISSUES VoL XXXV No. I March 2001 Veblen, Bourdieu, and Conspicuous Consumption Andrew B. Trigg Writtenjust one hundredyears ago, ThorsteinVeblen's Theoryof the Leisure Class ([1899] 1994) still representsa powerful critique of the neoclassical theory of con- sumption. In contrast to the individual's static maximization of utility according to exogenous preferences,as posited by the neoclassical approach,Veblen develops an evolutionaryframework in which preferencesare determinedsocially in relationto the positions of individualsin the social hierarchy.According to Veblen's theory of con- spicuous consumption,individuals emulate the consumptionpatterns of otherindivid- uals situated at higher points in the hierarchy. The social norms that govern such emulationchange as the economy and its social fabric evolve over time. Alongside a continuing,though limited, role in mainstreameconomics (Bagwell and Bemheim 1996; Basmannet al. 1988), the theory of conspicuousconsumption has in recentyears also been subjectedto considerablecriticism from outside of this main- stream. Three main issues have been raised. First, it has been argued that Veblen's approachis too restrictive in relying on the "trickle down" of consumptionpatterns from the top of the social hierarchy. The pacesetters for consumption may also be those at the bottom of the hierarchy(Fine and Leopold 1993; Lears 1993). It follows from this position that conspicuous consumptionlacks generality as a theory of con- sumptionsince it applies only to luxurygoods. Second, since Veblen's day it has been argued that consumers no longer display their wealth conspicuously. Status is con- veyed in more sophisticated and subtle ways (Canterbery1998; Mason 1998). And third, for those writing in the postmoderntradition, consumer behavior is no longer shapedby positions of social class but by lifestyles that cut across the social hierarchy (Featherstone1991; McIntyre 1992). Theauthor is a memberof the Faculty of Social Sciences, EconomicsDiscipline, at the Open University,Mil- ton Keynes, UK. 99 100 AndrewB. Trigg In this paperwe show that to some extent these argumentsmisrepresent Veblen's original conception of conspicuous consumptionand take it out of context in relation to his overall framework.In addition,in orderto develop a contemporaryresponse to these arguments we examine the possible contributionthat can be made using the work of PierreBourdieu, the sociologist and anthropologistwho has been describedas "France's leading living social theorist" (Shusterman 1999, 1). The link between Bourdieu and Veblen has alreadybeen noted in the literature.Colin Campbell(1995, 103), for example, has describedBourdieu as "themost importantcontemporary theo- rist of consumption proper"and stated that Bourdieu's main work, Distinction: A Social Critiqueof the Judgementof Taste (1984), "bearscomparison, in characterand importance,with Veblen's Theoryof the Leisure Class." It can be argued, however, that this relationshiphas not been widely recognized in the institutionalistliterature. For example, the recent critical appraisalof Veblen in the collection of essays edited by Doug Brown (1998) containsno referenceto Bourdieu's work. The contributionof this paperis to develop a defense and extension of the theoryof conspicuousconsump- tion by exploring the writings of Veblen and Bourdieu. An introductionto Veblen's theory of conspicuous consumptionin the first partof the paperis followed in the sec- ond partby a presentationof the main argumentsagainst it. In the thirdpart a response to each argumentis developed using Veblen and Bourdieu. Veblen's Theory of Conspicuous Consumption Veblen's theory of conspicuous consumption is based on the evolution of a lei- sure class whose membersare not requiredto work but appropriatea surplusproduced by those who do work, the working class. Once societies startto producea surplusthe relationshipbetween private propertyand status becomes increasingly important."It becomes indispensable to accumulate, to acquire property, in order to retain one's good name" (Veblen 1899, 29). A hierarchy develops in which some people own propertyand others do not. To own propertyis to have status and honor, a position of esteem in this hierarchy:to have no propertyis to have no status. Of course, the accumulationof propertycan indicate that a person has been effi- cient and productive-it can indicateprowess in financial matters.But Veblen argues that inheritedwealth confers even more statusthan wealth that is gained througheffi- ciency. "By a furtherrefinement, wealth acquired passively by transmission from ancestors to other antecedents presently becomes even more honorific than wealth acquired by the possessor's own effort" (Veblen [1899] 1994, 29). The old money held by aristocraticfamilies provides the most status since it establishes the most dis- tance from the work requiredfor its accumulation. Key to the transformationof wealth into statusis the social performanceof mem- bers of the leisure class. Statusderives from thejudgments that other members of soci- ety make of an individual's position in society, and for this position to be established Veblen,Bourdieu, and ConspicuousConsumption 101 there must be a display of wealth. Veblen identifies two main ways in which an indi- vidual can display wealth: through extensive leisure activities and through lavish expenditureon consumptionand services. The common threadthat runs throughboth of these types of display is "theelement of waste thatis common to both.... In the one case it is a waste of time and effort, in the other it is a waste of goods" (Veblen [1899] 1994, 85). Being able to engage in such wasteful activities is the key way in which members of the leisure class display their wealth and status. In principle, people can display their wealth through either method with equal facility-all this requiresis an effective network for word to get aroundabout a per- son's degree of leisure and the objects he or she possesses. Veblen argues, however, thatas the populationbecomes more mobile, communitiesbecome less close-knit. In a more mobile society people may be less well informed about the leisure activities in which other people engage, and so the display of wealth through consumption of goods becomes more importantthan the display of leisure (Veblen [1899] 1994). Veblen labels this type of behavior conspicuous consumption. People spend money on artifacts of consumption in order to give an indication of their wealth to othermembers of society. Conspicuousconsumption is viewed by Veblen as the most importantfactor in determiningconsumer behavior, not just for the rich but for all social classes. "The result is that the membersof each stratumaccept as their ideal of decency the scheme of life in vogue in the next higher stratum,and bend theirenergies to live up to that ideal" (84). Each social class tries to emulatethe consumptionbehav- ior of the class above it, to such an extent that even the poorest people are subject to pressuresto engage in conspicuous consumption."Very much of squalorand discom- fort will be enduredbefore the last trinketor the last pretence of pecuniarydecency is put away" (Veblen [ 1899] 1994, 85). This searchfor statusthrough consumption is never ending. Whatat one time may confer statusmay laterbe acquiredby all and confer no status.People must always try to acquire new consumption goods in order to distinguish themselves from others. When Veblen was writing in the 1890s, he viewed this drive for conspicuous con- sumptionas the main force behindthe consumerboom thatwas startingto gain pace in the United States. Problems with Conspicuous Consumption Historianshave also used the theory of conspicuous consumptionto explain the consumer revolution that coincided with the industrialrevolution in England during the eighteenthcentury-not least because this representedthe birthof consumersoci- ety. The notable Birth of a Consumer Society: The Commercializationof Eigh- teenth-CenturyEngland looks, among other things, at the success story of one of the great industrialpioneers of this period, the potter Josiah Wedgwood (McKendrick, Brewer, and Plumb 1982). It is arguedthat Wedgwood instigatedthe consumerboom 102 AndrewB. Trigg in potteryduring the eighteenthcentury by persuadingmembers of the Europeanaris- tocracy to use his wares. "By appealingto the fashionablecry for antiquities,by pan- dering to their requirements,by asking their advice and accepting their smallest orders, by flattery and attention, Wedgwood hoped to monopolize the aristocratic