‘Two Cheers for Materialism’ by James Twitchell & ‘Profiles in Splurging’ by Randall Patterson : A combined overview

In “Two Cheers for Materialism,” James Twitchell posits that “We live through things, we create ourselves through things and we change ourselves by changing our things.” When we look at this claim by the author, it sounds like a veiled criticism of a materialist culture. But through numerous apt examples and nuanced explanations, Twitchell comes around to acknowledge the power of consumerist impulses and seeks to explain what drives them.  He also argues that capitalist consumerism is not something that is imposed on people as academic critics often claim. Instead, the continued thriving of consumerism is due to our own innate needs, desires and aspirations. The article by Randall Patterson titled ‘Profiles in Splurging’ complements Twitchell’s core thesis.  This essay will qualify the aforementioned working thesis by considering all the facts and arguments presented in these two articles.

To a great extent, the claim in the working thesis can be viewed as a logical one and there is evidence all around us that validates and supports it. The acquisition of property and goods is often used as a hallmark of success where the ones who have the “best”, “biggest” or “most” of something are considered most successful. To appreciate that, one only needs to observe the mass media, especially television, magazines as well as online polls.  Every year Forbes comes out with a list of the richest in the world.  There are surveys to show, for instance which footballer owns the biggest car and art enthusiasts and collectors often strive to have the most extensive collection of paintings, books and many other ostentatious goods. For example Bill Gates is ranked as the richest man in the world, this ranking being based on our perception of money as an indirect endorsement for the man as the most successful businessman alive.  These measurements do not take into account what he has achieved, how many people he has helped or even how happy he is. All that counts are the possessions he has accumulated.  Thus the rest of America works tirelessly to acquire as much as they can and often forgetting to enjoy them since their primary goal is to be viewed as successful in their circles. The most direct route to that is to buy and flaunt. It is as if most Americans would pick money over happiness if they had a chance.

Twitchell is not blind to the obvious flaws of consumerist culture. Going by the centrality that society offers material possessions it would then appear that the poor lack meaning and inevitably faces exclusion from society. A look at the social stratification will confirm that the more one owns the higher they are to climb the ladder of status and prestige. For instance, I imagine the guards in an exclusive hotel are more likely to open the gate for an expensive looking top of the range car than they are for a homeless man or generally disheveled individual. Likewise most Ivy League educational institutions are meant to groom the next generation of political and business leaders at the exclusion of the poor. This discrimination transpires into the workplace as well, where graduates from Ivy League institutions are hired into managerial positions while the economically disadvantaged compete for entry level positions. This is because the consumerist society in which we exist sustains itself by excluding anyone who does not conform to the culture of endless buying and since human beings are social creatures, most of us try to keep up with the consumerist trends (Twitchell). The ‘cool’ and successful individuals and groups at the top of the chain who are the subject of the collective admiration from the less successful are extremely dynamic. This must be so otherwise the materialist   culture would come up even if they were to remain static for others to keep up with them. For instance when technology devices such as the new iPhone are unveiled, there are those who can afford to purchase them immediately notwithstanding the price. The rest will save until they can afford the device; however, some months down the line, when they are almost achieving this end, a new more expensive model is unveiled and quickly grabbed by the rich as the rest are left in second place as always. This cycle of changing trends and fashions is what ultimately drives consumerism and manipulates many Americans to keep buying items not for the items own sake but to enhance their identity. In other words, by flouting the possession of fashionable gadgets and accessories, consumers implicitly send out the message that they ‘belong’ or they are ‘successful’. But this identity is superficial and lacking in substance. It is based on an aspiration for vague attainments such as ‘status’.

1 2