Bachelor thesis freedom in consumerism

Freedom in consumerism Bachelor Nikoline Høgsgaard
Leon Aahave Uhd
1
Table of Contents
Abstract ............................................................................................................................ 2
Introduction...................................................................................................................... 2
Methodology (Nikoline).................................................................................................... 6
The Case - The Voluntary Simple Living Movement (Leon).............................................. 8
Theoretical Background (Leon) ...................................................................................... 11
The History of Consumerism ...................................................................................... 11
The Society of Consumers .......................................................................................... 12
The Society of Consumers as a Field .......................................................................... 15
Analysis (Nikoline) .......................................................................................................... 18
Alienation of Identity.................................................................................................. 19
Item-bound Imagoes .................................................................................................. 22
Retelling the Story ...................................................................................................... 25
Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 27
The “Social” Freedom (Leon)...................................................................................... 27
The “Personal” Freedom (Nikoline)............................................................................ 30
Dispossession out of Place (Leon) .............................................................................. 34
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 35
Suggestions for further investigation......................................................................... 37
Bibliography.................................................................................................................... 38

Leon Aahave Uhd
2
Abstract
Denne opgave søger at forstå fænomenet omkring ”The Voluntary Simplicity
Movement”. Dette er en voksende bevægelse af forbrugere, som vælger at
simplificere deres liv ved at nedsætte deres deltagelse i forbrugersamfundet drastisk.
Disse forbrugere oplever paradoksalt nok, at de ved at begrænse deres forbrugerfrihed
opnår en følelse af frihed. Opgaven søger gennem analyse og diskussion at belyse,
hvordan dette paradoks kan forstås antropologisk. Som teoretisk baggrund for
opgaven, tages der udgangspunkt i Zygmunt Baumans deskriptive teorier om
forbrugets sociale rolle i det amerikanske/vestlige samfund. Baumans observationer
diskuteres i relation til Pierre Bourdieu’s generative strukturalisme med henblik på at
skabe et analyseapparat, som kan belyse individets oplevelse af forbrugersamfundet.
Endvidere analyseres simplificeringsprocessen ud fra et aktørperspektiv med det
formål at forstå, hvordan materiel oprydning opleves af forbrugerne som et stærkt
værktøj til at genforhandle aspekter af identitet. Der argumenteres for at en
distinktion mellem en ’socialt’ oplevet frihed og en ’individuelt’ oplevet frihed er
relevant for at forstå informanternes genforhandling af identitet igennem processen,
og mødet mellem deres nye livsorientering og omverdenen. Da de møder en
modstand mellem både deres egne indlejrede dispositioner og pres fra omverdenen i
form af sociale relationer opstår der en konflikt. Vi belyser denne konflikt ved hjælp af
Mary Douglas’ teori om ’matter out of place’ med argumentationen om at vore
informanters positionering i forbrugersamfundet gør, at de falder uden for den
normale kategorisering og derved befinder sig i en gråzone mellem det, Bauman kalder
underklassen og en succesfuld forbruger. De bliver derfor fremmedgjorte i forhold til
samfundet og kan opfattes som tabuiserede.

Leon Aahave Uhd
3
Introduction
The present assignment seeks to analyze and discuss the practice of simplifying one's
life style, combining an investigation of the social role of consumerism in
contemporary western society and an analysis of the actual process of downshifting
seen from the perspective of the individual.
In 1995, the Trends Research Institute of Rhinebeck, NY declared simplifying life as
“one of the top trends of the nineties” (Cherrier 2007:3). The notion of simplicity in
this context practically means conveying to a simpler life style by de-cluttering,
downshift by minimizing their consumption, moving to smaller houses and working
less hours. In the process of downshifting, many of the downshifters choose to find
support and guide lines in therapeutically books and organized challenges. Among
others (333 project1
, 365 things less2
, 100 things reverse3
… ), the 100 thing challenge is
an example of concrete guide lines of how to simplify your life. The challenge implies
only owning 100 objects or less for a year. Our anthropological curiosity was first
aroused with a TED-talk about the subject, by Dave Bruno, the inventor of “the 100
thing challenge”. In the TED-talk he says:
"Given the circumstances of our times, simplicity is the actionable idea
that will meet the challenges of our lives and our world. Here is why: Since
the dawn of the modern era, individual affluence and national economies
has increasingly relied on excess as proof for success. We have created
and propagated life styles and economies that only allegedly thrive when
we extract too much. […] Everywhere we look we have stuff, and yet
people still feel anxious, many economies are on the brink. […] What can
we do about this; you and I? - Simplicity is action."4
1
'The 333 project', entered the 11th of December 2012 at 4pm, http://theproject333.com
2
'365 things less', accessed the 11th of December 2012 at 4pm, http://www.365lessthings.com
3
'100 Things Reverse', accessed the 11th of December at 4pm, http://bemorewithless.com/2012/the-
reverse-100-thing-challenge/
4
'Youtube', accessed on the 10th of December 2012,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Q7VUpYpTwI8

Leon Aahave Uhd
4
A study conducted by Juliet Schor showed that American families usually compare
themselves with a group owning 4-5 times more than themselves (Schor 1998:4). Half
the families said they could not afford everything they really needed. She calls the
phenomenon upscale spending, referring to the fact that:
“what we want grows into what we need, at a sometimes dizzying rate”
(ibid:6).
Since then, with discussions about financial, resource and climate crisis the topic of
consumption has not become less relevant.
What we find interesting about the case of voluntary downshifting is the fact that the
participants do not seek to resign from consumer society (as some other movements).
They do not reject consumption as such, but wish to ”break” with what is experienced
as dependency on stuff within the consumer society. In the present assignment we
would like to investigate what activates the individual to decide to simplify, and which
consequences (good or bad) they experience by choosing this life style?
We argue that a theoretical discussion about freedom is essential to understand what
is on stake for these people. As the activity of shopping usually is linked with exactly
the experience of freedom and happiness, we find it interesting to investigate what the
difference is between the freedom found in shopping, and the freedom the
downshifters paradoxically find through constraining this freedom. To clarify what this
paradox entails, we provide an anthropological analysis of the social meaning of
freedom understood within the cultural context of the western/American consumer
society. Through a discussion on the topic we seek to clarify two questions: 1. What is
the meaning of freedom for the consumer in the society of consumers?
2. What is the meaning of freedom for the simple livers we have investigated?
These two questions leads to our main question in relation to the participants in the
Simplicity Movement:
What are the consequences of living simply within the consumerist society and how
can we understand that from an anthropological point of view?

Leon Aahave Uhd
5
As the theoretical background for investigating these questions, we use Zygmunt
Bauman as the descriptive frame of the consumer society. Bauman also offers some
possible answers on freedom as a social matter in which the informants’ experience of
dispossession can be investigated and discussed. To make a useful theoretical frame
from Bauman’s more descriptive observations, we incorporate Pierre Bourdieu and his
theory of generative structuralism. This allows us to analyze the individual in the
context of the consumer society as a field. By doing this we are able to outline the rules
in the field, thus understanding how the social order is reproduced through certain
behavior. By choosing to simplify their life style, we suggest that the informants
simultaneously re-evaluate the rules and the influence these have in their particular
life situation.
What this theoretical frame work cannot clarify are the reasons for the participants to
choose to simplify their lives in the first place, and how the consequences of doing so
are experienced by the individual. Therefore we will use the more existentialistic
theoretical framework of “imagoes”, as presented by Dan P. McAdams to investigate
the participants’ experience of identity-negotiation through the dispossession. We
suggest that imagoes (self-images) can be linked to items and therefore takes part in
the participants’ identity creation linked to past memories, potential future scenarios
and social desirable appearance. Through dispossession the participant not only sort
materials, but re-evaluate these self-images seeking to define who they want to be.
We argue that this sorting of self-images through dispossession leads to an experience
of spaciousness and emptiness as a result of the reduction from an overwhelming
amount of self-images assembled over time to few actively chosen self-images. The
process of dispossession thus becomes a powerful tool for the informants to re-
evaluate one’s life situation.
We will argue that the simple livers are matter out of place in relation to the society of
consumers since they have the capitals necessary for being successful but actively
chooses not to use them. This places them in between being a successful and a failed
consumer - thereby in a grey-zone that makes them a danger to the reproduction of
the society of consumers; indirectly questioning the assumptions power of the field.

Leon Aahave Uhd
6
In the following section we will present the theoretical frame used in the assignment.
The strengths and limitations of our choices taken in this matter will be presented and
evaluated. Subsequently, the Voluntary Simplicity Movement will be presented,
outlining the drivers for its participants. Then, the theoretical frame work of
respectively Bauman and Bourdieu will be outlined in an exposition and theoretical
analysis.
Methodology
In the present assignment there are several things to be taken into account.
We have had to do an extensive research as there is close to nothing written about
freedom and consumption in the field of anthropology. We have therefore set up a
theoretical frame for discussing Zygmunt Bauman’s definition of freedom as a social
driver for societal management against the freedom of existential clarification of
identity experienced by individuals seeking a simpler life through dispossession
practices. We are aware that presenting theories on societal level and linking them to
existential, personal experience is an ambitious project, hardly possible to adequately
outline in the scope of this assignment. Nonetheless, the span between the two
constitutes pronounced anthropological considerations we find very rewarding for a
further discussion on the topic.
Treating the topic of freedom in the context of anthropology furthermore raises some
important questions. Few anthropologists have developed theoretical work on the
subject, and the interest for further theoretical development has been scarce. This,
despite Boas and Malinowski being among the main contributors. In the present
asignment, we have chosen to mainly focus on Bauman's notion of freedom in relation
to consumer society. Taking point of departure in Boas' defintion of freedom we
discuss and criticize these observations seeking to understand the feeling of freedom
experienced by the informants. The notion of freedom will thus be investigated as a
social experience rather than a metaphysical quality.

Leon Aahave Uhd
7
To set up a social context for consumerism we have used Zygmunt Bauman's extensive
studies of the subject and decided to use him as the anchor of our assignment. In a
critical study of Bauman, Michael Hviid Jacobsen (2008) notes that he "...is truly a
generalist rather than a specialist sociologist", since he has never made a specific
theory and rather been occupied with describing the consequences of the
transformation from modernity to liquid modernity (ibid:3). Using Bauman allows us to
understand consumerism in a social context of society seen from a wide range of
theoretical considerations.
We are aware that Bauman’s notion of the consumerist society is very structuralistic.
On the level of individuals the options for choosing one’s own life style is limited within
the pattern of consumerism, where the possibility for changing habits are more or less
non-existent (Bauman 2007). Nonetheless, using Bauman is a good starting point for
investigating the context of what our informants feel they are facing when trying to
change their behavior: the chance of exclusion from society, fear and existential crisis.
To make a useful theoretical frame from Bauman’s “general” observations, we choose
to incorporate the theory of Pierre Bourdieu and his actor-focused theories in regard
to generative structuralism.
To qualify the discussion of what the social meaning of freedom encompasses for the
individuals voluntarily choosing the simple living, we analyze the process of
dispossession seen from the perspective of the individual. As this process of
dispossession has shown to encompass several conflicts within the social life and
identity construction of the individual, we choose to use the notion of imago as it is
presented by Dan P. McAdams. This allows us to understand why dispossession
becomes more than physical de-cluttering to the informants, encompassing a wider
existential clarification of the individual’s identity and values.
We have decided to base our empirical data mainly on already conducted surveys. In
order to get a macro overview of the Voluntary Simplicity Movement internationally
(with focus on Western individuals who have actively chosen to change their habits)
we use an article by Alexander and Ussher (2012). Furthermore we use two qualitative
studies carried out by Helene Cherrier in 2007 and 2009. In total 22 informants were

Leon Aahave Uhd
8
interviewed 2-3 hours about their voluntary process of downshifting (Cherrier 2007:5;
Cherrier 2009:330). Additionally, quotes from Mary Grigsby’s book “Buying time and
getting by” as well as parts of Dave Bruno’s book “The 100 Thing Challenge” will be
used. Also blogs written by voluntary downshifters are part of the analysis to back up
the findings in the already mentioned studies.
We are aware that the field we investigate is hard to frame but due to the scope of the
paper and the theoretical focus in our discussion we find that our material has the
necessary quality.
The Case - The Voluntary Simple Living Movement
The Voluntary Simplicity Movement5
is defined as:
"...a diverse social movement made up of people who are resisting high
consumption lifestyles and who are seeking, in various ways, a lower
consumption but higher quality of life alternative" (Alexander & Ussher
2012:66).
We have chosen to use Alexander and Ussher's investigation of the Simplicity
Movement as their extensive studies offer a global overview and understanding of the
movement in relation to the current events in the world. They offer an overview of the
drivers the individuals have for joining the simplicity movement. It has to be noted that
their project, as directors of the Simplicity Institute, is to promote the simple living
model as the future mainstream model for achieving a more sustainable world
(ibid:67).
The movement emerged in the eighties and nineties when gradually more individuals
decided to change their patterns of consumption. The movement consist of great
diversity of people situated world-wide and with different ages.
According to Alexander and Ussher, a certain perception of human impact on the
overall condition of the world termed ‘the ecological overshoot’, is seen as a main
driver for the movement. The 'ecological overshoot' is a term for the impact humans
5
From now on referred to as the Simplicity Movement.

Leon Aahave Uhd
9
have on the ecological balance on the planet and climate. Even though this concern
has entered the attention of international leaders and governments, the initiatives are
simply seen as not being enough for 'saving' the planet. There is a feeling that even
more needs to be done; especially in relation to consumer patterns (ibid:68).
They furthermore mention the problems concerning poverty in 3rd world countries as
opposed to the plenty in 1st world countries. By owning less the individual takes a
stand and seeks to justify their own lives seen in this wide context of global concerns
(ibid:68-70).
The last and perhaps most important reason to live a more simple life is according to
the authors that a high level of consumption is not necessarily making people more
happy or content:
"Finally, what makes the problems outlined above all the more troubling
is the fact that high consumption lifestyles, so often held up as the peak of
human development, are in many cases engendering an unexpected
discontent or malaise among those who live them." (ibid).
There is a feeling of inconsistency between the experience of pressure for
consumption in society against the values in personal life. By choosing to simplify one's
life, the individual experiences a sense of agency.
These are the different reasons for people to engage in the Simplicity Movement.
Some are doing it because of macro scale issues, some are doing it due to micro-scale
issues and others again are doing it in order to attain a more meaningful life.
Alexander and Ussher conducted an online survey among 2131 ‘normal consumers’
from different countries in the 'first world', actively choosing to live a simple life. The
participants were primarily based in North America (970), Australia (871) and the rest
were from Europe and Japan. The majority of respondents lived in urban cities and
therefore practiced simplicity within a 'normal setting' and not far from 'civilization'.
Findings are as follows:

Leon Aahave Uhd
10
"... 28 percent of participants lived in large cities (over 500,001 people);
18 percent lived in medium-sized cities (between 100,000 and 500,000
people); 16 percent lived in small cities (between 15,001 and 99,999
people); 17 percent lived in small towns (under 15,000 people); and 21
percent lived rurally (i.e. non-urban or farm)" (ibid:73).
Figure 1 Percentage of participants listing specific motivations for living simply (ibid:76)
In the survey, the participants were allowed to pick several reasons for choosing a
simple life style. These reasons are listed above and shows that 80% picked the
environmental concern as the main driver, while the second (to be healthier), third
(self-sufficiency), fourth (de-cluttering life) and fifth (to save money) are individual
drivers. The movement thus seems to consist of people who find personal possibilities
in living more simple while still having a relation to the global aspects of the consumer
society.
In the section above we have outlined the main drivers for the individuals choosing to
simplify their lives. In this context it is important noting that the movement consist of

Leon Aahave Uhd
11
individual initiatives to carry out the downshifting in own lives and is thus 'loose' in its
collective structure. The simple livers find support and guidance within the frame of
the movement but do not seek to oppose the practice on others. Rather, they wish to
spread the practice by example. As a concluding remark, it is worth noting that the
Simplicity Movement not see themselves as anti-consumers but rather as less-
consumers.
In the following section we will propose a theoretical frame for the further analysis and
discussion on the social maening of freedom. With point of departure in Bauman's
description of consumerism in contemporary western society, we will, through a
theoretical analysis, incorporate Bourdieu's theory within this context.
Theoretical Background
In order to understand the background of the Simplicity Movement we need to
understand what it tries to give a new perspective on; contemporary consumption. In
this section we will therefore outline the theoretical framework for our investigation,
based on the studies of Zygmunt Bauman on the notion of the society of consumers6
.
The History of Consumerism
Consumption (production, storage, distribution and disposal of objects) has all through
history been at the core of human existence. The reciprocal nature of production and
consumption has created the foundation for society where people barter and
exchange products, thereby creating a sense of identity as groups or individuals. The
pattern of consumption has not changed much, but one aspect that deserves attention
is how the distance between producer and consumer has been ever growing (ibid:25-
26). According to Bauman this space between consumer and producer is where
"...history could be written in the terms of the ingenious ways in which
that space was colonized and administered" (ibid:26).
Bauman explains contemporary consumerist practices as being opposed to those of
the Industrial/Modern Era's. He makes a distinction between the solid state modern
6
We will from now on only relate our analysis to the society of consumers.

Leon Aahave Uhd
12
era (society of producers) and the liquid modern era (society of consumers). He
outlines a clear distinction and almost dichotomy between these two, making an
understanding of the solid modernity necessary for understanding the liquid
modernity. Shortly, he describes how we have moved away from a stable society
focused on long term perspectives in our consumption to a society where the
immediate fulfillment of our desires and thereby short-term perspectives are being
adhered.
The Society of Consumers
By the modern era of the solid state society, Bauman focus on the creation of a sense
of stability in an unstable world. He defines it as follows:
"The appropriation and possession of goods ensuring (or at least
promising to ensure) comfort and esteem might indeed have been the
principal motive behind human wishes and longings in the society of
producers, a kind of society, committed to the cause of stable security and
secure stability, relying for its own long-term reproduction on patterns of
individual behavior designed to follow those motives" (ibid:29).
Due to the long-term perspective on fulfilling needs, the society of producers were
focused on the individual consumption. You would buy for security and durability in
order to create a sense of continuity and safety for yourself and thereby portraying
yourself as worthy of trust and credit (ibid:30).
Our contemporary society of consumers is according to Bauman, in some ways a direct
opposite of the society of producers. Instead of relying on a future aspect of rationality
and long-term stability, it is focused on the immediate fulfillment of desires. It has thus
changed the patterns of the 'steady' state into something that is unsteady, focusing on
an ever rising volume of, and intensity of desires as opposed to a gratification of basic
needs - from normal consumption into consumerism (ibid:31).
This transformation is called the consumerist revolution and entails a phase where
consumption changed character as it became central in the lives of most people thus
becoming a social phenomenon. Consumerism is not based on the individual needs as

Leon Aahave Uhd
13
in the solid modern era but created on a macro level detached from the individual. The
society of consumers sets parameters of 'right conduct' for the good life, thereby
creating an experience of human togetherness (ibid:26-28).
As economical growth is determined by the amount of produced and sold goods, the
need for intensifying the speed of consumerism emerges. In the society of producers
the focus in consumption was on the long-term expectations to the product and
thereby also an aspect of postponing one's immediate needs. In the society of
consumers on the contrary, each promise of satisfaction when acquiring a product
must be deceitful or at least exaggerated in order to keep the circulation of needs in
motion and thereby tempt the consumer to keep on buying additional things (ibid:46-
47). As Bauman puts it:
"The realm of hypocrisy stretching between popular beliefs and the
realities of consumer's lives is a necessary condition of a properly
functioning society of consumers" (ibid:47)
The biggest change compared to former patterns of consumption is according to
Bauman that people themselves becomes commodities to be promoted and sold. He
terms the situation as the saleability of the consumer and defines the strategy of the
individual as:
"…obtaining qualities for which there is already a market demand, or
recycling the qualities already possessed into commodities for which
demand can go on to be created" (ibid:56)
This commoditization of the consumer thereby creates a society that has a character of
totality, creating the life goal of the individual to make oneself a valuable commodity.
By obtaining the wished job the individual gains the wished economical situation,
which creates access to the market and the material commodities that again can be
used to build social status (ibid:57).
What then if a member of society cannot or do not want to participate in this process
of commoditization? According to Bauman these people are 'condemned' to the
underclass. They are seen as failed consumers as they are not contributing to the

Leon Aahave Uhd
14
society and furthermore not able to reproduce the wanted behavior, acquiring
commodities and are thereby unable to commoditize themselves (ibid:124-125). In
Bauman's terms these people are victimized and is treated as people to be avoided. He
writes:
"Everyone else in the society of consumers would gain if they [flawed
consumers] vanished. Think: everyone else will gain when you fall out of
the consumer game and your turn to vanish has arrived..." (ibid:124)
Bauman lists the people in the group of 'excluded members' as a mix of welfare single
mothers, criminals, alcoholics, illegal immigrants etc. They are 'loners' without the
resources to engage in social relations (except the close family and dubious other
outcasts) and do not have a collective identity with the other underclass members
(ibid:123). Therefore, if not consuming, one is automatically excluding oneself from
society and the chance of creating social status.
In other words, the society of consumers creates a reproduction circle of
commoditization, in which:
"...little if any dissent, resistance or rebellion [arouses], thanks to the
expedient of representing the new obligation (the obligation to choose) as
freedom of choice." (ibid:74)
We have now defined Bauman's notion of the society of consumers, and the social
implications Bauman finds in this societal construction. It has also become clear that
Bauman's view on society is very structuralistic. The fundamental rules of society of
consumers are impossible to escape without being excluded as failed consumers. These
aspects will be treated and discussed further in the discussion.
In the following, Pierre Bourdieu will be presented, seeking to create a theoretical
frame work in which the experience of de-cluttering can be analyzed. By doing this, the
perspective of the individual's agency is provided, from which Bauman's observations
can be further explored and discussed.

Leon Aahave Uhd
15
The Society of Consumers as a Field
A field is, in Bourdieu's terminology, a social space with its own rules, truths and
legitimate actions. Fields are more or less autonomous compared to the wider social
structure and has an implicit and explicit set of rules that defines how people can
behave and struggle for power and identity (Bourdieu 1994:53).
We will use Bauman's descriptions of the society of consumers to define the field. The
social rules of the field of contemporary consumption is relating to a strategy of
consuming in order to develop your identity both social and individual. The rules of the
field is that the actor have to be an active consumer acquiring commodities of prestige
and commoditizing himself to become an attractive asset or product in relation to job
offers and social relations (Bauman 2007:57). In the field of consumerism there is no
possibility of not participating in consumerist conduct since you will be excluded from
social relation and 'victimized' in Bauman's terms. Furthermore the sole possibility of
attaining power in the field of consumerism is through your consumption.
Habitus is the social reality that we live in. This reality is constructed by the relation
between the structures of society in the material world as well as the interpretation of
the agents inhabiting the field. It is a system of dispositions (lasting, acquired schemes
of perception, thought and action) that is consisting of the continuous mediation
between the societal rules of the field and the individual's experience of the same.
With constructing the term habitus, Bourdieu gives a space for explaining the change
of rules in a field so as to say that the development of a certain practice is not only
determined by society (Bourdieu 1974:86) .
In the field there is an ongoing symbolic struggle of power based on the capitals of the
agent . Capital can be understood as Bauman's resources, which should not just be
understood as actual money or assets but also as social and cultural resources that is
used in the struggle for power in a certain field (Davis 2008:92). There is three
different kinds of capital in a field - it can be cultural, social and economic capital.
These three spheres of value is what constitutes the possibilities for power and
thereby the positioning of the agent. In Bourdieu's theory the cultural capital is the
most important since it related to the agents upbringing and thereby the predefined

Leon Aahave Uhd
16
starting position based on parents background (class), education quality and
internalized values (Bourdieu 1986:243).
The social capital is to what extent the agent is able to make a network with other
individuals and thereby creating a membership in a group. Economic capital is related
to material values - money, assets etc. The capitals are affecting each other in the
sense that the agent can convert economic capital to social or cultural capital through
for example in the case of consumerism choosing prestigious commodities, buying art
objects or having a high social capital through network to get access to a well-paid job.
In other instances you cannot. An example is the cultural education. This is something
that you have to study intensively or be brought up in a setting that puts value in these
issues. (ibid:249).
The symbolic struggle with the use of the different capitals based on the rules of the
field is where the actors are positioning themselves in relation to each other. The
struggle is about trying to create a commodity of self through a combination of the
capitals that are desirable in relation to others and the field. Symbolic capital is the
description of the ideal combination of capital in a field and thereby power. The
relation between capitals is different from field to field and thereby the also the
possibility for gaining power for the agent. An example is in the field of art. In order to
understand what pieces are of value you need to have the needed cultural capital to
distinguish it from other pieces, as well as the economic capital to for example buy
(ibid:243).
Habitus is a set of practices that are incorporated into the actor and resulting in a
certain behavior that has a routine character. That means that most of the actions
conducted by the agent is unconscious and un-reflected - thereby being an implicit
truth in the field. The agents actions, when following the rules, is reproducing the
implicit truths in the field and thereby legitimizing it.
This relates directly to our case with the simplicity movement since the problem with
Bauman is that he is mainly describing two possibilities for an individual in the society

Leon Aahave Uhd
17
consumers, namely; adhering to the rules of the consumerism or being a failed
consumer.
This takes us to the perhaps most relevant term in relation to Bourdieu - doxa. Doxa is
defined as the situation when there is accordance between habitus and the field. It is a
situation where the society is in 'harmony' and actively reproducing a certain set of
practices in a fundamental, unquestioned way. The society is perceived as natural and
continuously reproducing a certain set of behavior through the activity of the actors
present in the field.
Since the field that we have described is that of the society of consumers we would
argue, based on Bauman, that there is a doxic situation in relation to the way that
consumption is articulated. With Bauman's words the society of consumers is, as
before mentioned, a society that:
"...promotes, encourages or enforce the choice of a consumerist lifestyle and life
strategy that dislikes all alternative cultural options; a society in which adapting to the
precepts of consumer culture and following the them strictly is, to all practical intents
and purposes, the sole unquestionably approved choice; a feasible, and so also a
plausible choice - and a condition for membership" (Bauman 2007:53).
What happens then when the consumer or agent cannot see himself as playing by the
implicit rules in the society of consumers? As mentioned before Bauman does not see
this possibility in the society of consumers since there is but two options; either you
are in or you are out!
We have now shown the societal pressure for reproducing consumerist practices in the
society of consumers. This leads to our main question concerning where the freedom
is in the choices of the agents. If there is a system that defines the limits of choice by,
according to Bauman presenting the obligation of choice as the freedom of choice, how
can we then talk about freedom?
Freedom is therefore a key concept that must be investigated to achieve a better
understanding of Bauman’s societal analysis of liquid modernity. This will be
extensively treated in the discussion. Before, an analysis will be provided. In this

Leon Aahave Uhd
18
section we will investigate how the dispossession process is experienced from the
individual’s perspective. The following section will seek to answer the questions: 1.
Why do the informants choose to simplify their life style? 2. How is the process of
dispossession experienced by the individual? and 3. Which effect do the informant
experience from disposing?
Analysis
With point of departure in the qualitative study of dispossession conducted by Cherrier
we will investigate how the practice of de-cluttering is experienced as existential
clarification of identity:
"…the process of dispossession is an ongoing journey of identity
negotiation […]. [It] shows a struggle to reconcile the past with the
present and the envisioned future. It knits together fragments of history
and of social and personal experiences into a mixing of identities. This
process requires the identification of missing identities, unwanted
identities, or aged identities that needed to be replaced or adapted to the
new vision of the world." (Cherrier 2007:23)
In the following, an analysis of this journey will be provided. Firstly it will be shown
that the informants’ experience of materiality as a burden plays a central role in a
gradually built up feeling of identity alienation and societal pressure. A “triggering
event” starts reflections upon this matter, causing the informants to re-evaluate their
life situation and take action through a physical and symbolic de-cluttering of
possessions and identity. It is shown that the informant in the process of dispossession
is confronted with past and future; desired and undesired selves represented in
objects. This enables the informant to clarify which roles these “selves” occupy in
one’s current life situation, re-arranging and re-negotiating which are desirable in the
future construction of identity.

Leon Aahave Uhd
19
Alienation of Identity
In the study of Cherrier, it seems that at the core of downshifting lies an experience of
conflict between the wish to live in accordance with societal values and creating a
fulfilling life:
"While several informants reflected on the societal pressure […], most
informants mentioned concepts […] such as: ‘‘consumption machine,’’ […]
‘‘waste’’ (Angie), ‘‘fill up the earth with trash’’ and ‘‘land fills’’ (Michelle),
‘‘brainwashing branding’’ (Alison), the ‘‘superficial,’’ ‘‘stuff’’ and
‘‘newness’’ (Andrew), our ‘‘culture’’ (Simon), ‘‘take refuge in the material’’
‘‘fear of intimacy’’ (Scott), ‘‘advertising’’ (Maria, Lisa, and Alison),
‘‘mainstream’’ (Maria), ‘‘materialism’’ (Dave) and the ‘‘city culture’’
(Alison). Central to each concept is the existence of normative forces
suppressing informants’ self-expression and desired identity." (Cherrier
2009:332)
The material aspect of society is by the informants articulated in hostile terms, and
seen as something superficial and suppressive to self-expression. The “consumption
machine” creates “waste”, launch “brainwashing branding”, “fear intimacy” and offers
a “refuge in the material”. This refuge is seen as the easy solution to create a
functional life style, but as counts for all of the informants they reach a point of
acknowledging the limitations of contentment within the consumers pursuing of
material goods and the social status and money gained through work (Grigsby
2004:11). On a blog under the title “how crap took over my life – and how I intent to
take it back”, Greg describes a moment of re-evaluation concerning the role of
materials in his life. When moving to a new house he realized:
"I remember driving across Kansas, thinking that there was a lifetime of
accumulated possessions in the back of that truck. No doubt each item
had some special meaning, but at that moment, it all seemed like useless

Leon Aahave Uhd
20
baggage. “I could drive this thing into a lake,” I thought, “and be done
with it forever.”7
In line with the interviews conducted by Cherrier, this quote suggests how material
possessions can accumulate and become what is experienced as a burden. This burden
again is seen as contributing to an alienation of self and confusion or contradiction in
the sense of self, building up to a ‘‘not me’’ identity (2009:331). Dave Bruno writes in
the foreword of his book:
"The 100 thing Challenge, which my book describes, was one of several
responses to the unsettled feeling I developed after years of living a life
filled with stuff instead of contentment – after arriving at a reasonable
version of the American dream and still groping for more, I felt I might be
chasing after what was not mine to have, and what I could never get
anyway. It occurred to me that I felt less like myself and more like
someone I should not be." (Bruno 2012:xiii)
To understand this alienation, the theory of Dan P. McAdams might be useful.
McAdams understands the identity of the individual as an ongoing narrative, in which
social roles represent the characters that drives the story forward (1993:117). These
are what he calls “imagoes”. These work as one-dimensional ideal identities the
individual seek to realize (ibid:122). As examples of such, McAdams mentions the
sophisticated professor, the rough boy from the wrong side of the town, the steady
caregiver, the clown and the peacemaker (ibid:123). Within a single story, different
and at times contradictory imagoes want to be heard, and thereby may give rise to
fundamental identity conflicts in life. For instance the imagoes of a successful and
aggressive lawyer and the nurturing caregiver might have problems sharing the same
“scene” (ibid:132).
As counts for the typical modern man or woman, dealing with many imagoes in
everyday life, he presents the metaphor of a “juggler”. They try to be “everything for
everybody”, adjusting their role according to “audience” and situation (ibid:126).
7
Grist - a beacon in the smog, acessed on the 6th of December 10 am, http://grist.org/living/2011-11-
21-stuffed-to-the-gills-how-crap-took-over-my-life-and-how-i-intend/

Leon Aahave Uhd
21
These people manage to be good at what Goffman presents as “the presentation of
self in everyday life”, and manage to gain admiration from others for seeming “well-
rounded and adjusted” (ibid:126). McAdams criticizes Goffman for seeing the
individual as only the sum of these performances and therefore fails to articulate the
identity which binds them together (Ibid:125). According to McAdams these “jugglers”,
or “protean men”, lack a unifying narrative binding together their disparate interests
and activities. Therefore, there is no coherence in their life as their self is split into
imagoes which are alienated to each other (Ibid:126).
At moments of clarity, these conflicts might reveal a different conscious meaning of
our identity, where parts that before seemed trivial, suddenly take on a central role in
the definition of self (McAdams 1993:12). Such moments of clarity is by Cherrier called
a triggering event causing the informants to re-evaluate his or her life situation
(2007:14). The triggering event can be any life event such as divorce, the loss of a close
person or other changes in life (Cherrier 2009:331). In other cases the trigger event
might seem insignificantly small, but either way provokes reflection upon the current
life situation. One informant describes her trigger event as follows:
"I found an old photo of myself in my room when I was a child, when I had
very little possessions, very little things and I was just sitting there and I
could remember when that photo was taken how happy I was on that
day. I was climbing a tree just before the photo was taken and I had my
dogs and I look at that photo and remember, ‘That’s who I am. Someone
who doesn’t need lots of things’. I don’t know what had triggered to get
to that point where I needed the moment of clarity. . . obviously lots of
experience had come before then. (Maria)" (ibid)
The triggering event was by the informants used as an orientation-point in the
Cherrier’s interviews and was sorting observations in a “before” and “after” category.
“Before” was by an informant characterized by being “asleep and not noticing what
happened,” and by another as not thinking: “whenever I did blind buying of name
brands or whatever, it was just because I wasn’t thinking” (2007:14). The “before” is
thus characterized by blind acceptance, which was then interrupted by the “triggering

Leon Aahave Uhd
22
event”, causing them to pause and reflect on their current life situation (ibid:15).These
reflections were experienced by the informants as displacing trust and reliability of
persons and things, receding the certainty of identity and the sense of societal role
(ibid:15).
Conditions which “before” was part of identity creation is therefore suddenly seen as
problematic and meaningless (ibid:16). To de-clutter in this respect is seen as a
powerful tool to regain control and ownership:
"Clutter makes our mind lose control. An organized and clutter free
home gives us a lot more control over the situations and decisions in our
life. […] De-cluttering could really change our lives. With the wonderful
feeling of freedom and accomplishment […], our minds will be calmer and
clearer."8
Not only the physical space, but also other aspects of life seem to be affected by
materiality. These are by the informants ascribed a central role in organization of life,
making the process of dispossession more than a physical de-cluttering of the house.
Dispossession gives back the control over one’s life, and creates “the wonderful feeling
of freedom”. De-cluttering has life changing potential.
In the following we will look closer into the process of dispossession seeking to
understand why this is experienced as such a powerful tool for re-evaluating one’s
identity and life situation. Using the presented theory of McAdams we argue that
imagoes can be symbolically represented in items.
Item-bound Imagoes
As a reaction towards the triggering event, the informants create a space of
detachment to social ties which used to define them. Cherrier argues that this stage of
separation is what creates the distance the individual needs to re-evaluate one’s
current life situation:
8
'The Green Minimalist Blog', entered the 6
th
of December 1 pm, http://thegreenminimalist.blogspot.dk/

Leon Aahave Uhd
23
"I needed to have a mental place to put my head up and take stock of the
different opportunities, because I wasn’t going to just follow a
mainstream path any more. I had to free my space, my mental, emotional
and physical space. (Maria) (Cherrier 2009:332)
The separation with the “mainstream path” is sought through freeing the “mental,
emotional and physical space”. From the described experiences of the informants, it
seems that this can be achieved simultaneously through the physical de-cluttering. In
order to understand this, we create the term of “item-bound imago”. As we have
explained before, imagoes are archetypical patterns for human thought. An individual
is not his imagoes. Rather, his identity is a story created through a casting and
recasting of imagoes through narrated time (McAdams 1993:124). The imagoes thus
personify the patterns of identity, referring to past, present and future; desired and
undesired selves (ibid:127). When de-cluttering, the informants are faced with such
imagoes when deciding which objects to keep and which not to keep. As a woman
writes on her blog:
"… as I got rid of more and more stuff, I came to realize how much of who
I am is defined by the stuff that I own. Not just to the outside world, but
to myself as well. I own original art, so I am an art-lover. I own
contemporary furniture, so I am a sophisticated urbanite (or at least I tell
myself that!). I have cool garden furniture, so I am ecologically aware."9
The imagoes explicitly mentioned in this quote are “art-lover” and “sophisticated
urbanite”. These are desired selves that she incorporates in her identity pattern and
furthermore wants to be identified with by the outside world. The imagoes are
attached to materiality, and in this case refer to her “original art” and “contemporary
furniture”. We therefore suggests, that imagoes besides being thought experiments
for identity creation, also might be extended to symbolically incorporating items as
well (Belk 1988:139). These we call item-bound imagoes. Besides the item-bound
9
'Ursula Jorch - The Intentional Nomad', entered the 6th of December 11 am,
http://www.ursulajorch.com/blog/2011/who-am-i-without-my-stuff-part-1/

Leon Aahave Uhd
24
imagoes oriented towards the creation of social capital and acceptance (like in the
example above), other item-bound imagoes are oriented towards either past or
future. The future selves take the role as potential imagoes; as future scenarios of
what we hope or fear to become (McAdams 1993:128).
An example of two potential imagoes for fear and hope could be a twenty-six-year-old
writer’s hope for receiving a Pulitzer-prize in the future in the one hand, but on the
other hand fears to end up as unknown, indebted and chronically frustrated. For the
understanding of how potential imagoes can be bound to items, the following quote is
illustrative:
"You could say that the hardest thing for me to give up was the idea of
being a master artisan. But since being an artisan isn’t a “thing”, I’ll
confess that it was my woodworking tools, which I hoped would get me to
the level of master artisan, that were hardest for me to part with. (Bruno
2010:75)
In this quote the potential imago is the “master artisan”, while the item-bound imago
is the woodworking tools. The woodworking tools were a symbol of the skills which he
hoped to realize in the future. By either keeping or disposing the woodworking tools
he confronts a potential imago of being a master artisan in the future. When he
decided to dispose them, he also disposed a potential imago. By confronting potential
imagoes like this, a clearer idea of direction and value for the future emerges. In the
same way it seems that items representing the past can confuse the informant’s
experience of agency and direction. A woman writes on her blog:
"We don’t start out being defined by our stuff. Most of us buy stuff that is
in alignment with who we are, and so our stuff is a reflection of that
identity. But over time, we change, our identities change, we grow, and
yet many of us, including me, still hang on to our stuff. The thing is, it’s a
way of hanging on to the past. It’s usually not a conscious process, but
the past in the form of these things we’ve accumulated starts to drag us

Leon Aahave Uhd
25
down, prevents us from moving forward into the present and the
future."10
The dispossession practice thus becomes an evaluation of positive and negative
memories from the past, potential futures and manifestation of social status which are
all symbolically bound to the owned objects. As it is argued by Cherrier, de-cluttering
in this sense becomes a process of emotional detachment from objects. The objects, as
item-bound imagoes, takes part in the defining pattern of identity, and therefore
disposing an item also entails a separation from part of the self (Cherrier 2009:329).
The process of dispossession therefore becomes fairly complex when a person has
extended great parts of his identity to items and thereby accumulated a great amount
of item-bound imagoes. This also explains why the decision of engaging with
downshifting and de-cluttering appears as extremely overwhelming to most of the
informants. Contrary, when having dealt with the prioritization of imagoes, the
physical de-clutter becomes easier:
"… if you understand yourself and where you’re coming from and what
your needs are then you can go out there and get rid of the unnecessary
junk. (Andrew)" (ibid:335)
The notion of extended self thus becomes central to understanding the process of
dispossession. When the individual confer symbolical importance to their possessions,
incorporating them in their constructional understanding of identity, dispossession
becomes a complex matter to deal with for that person. To dispose items, the
individual needs to face the symbolical meaning of their possessions and categorize
the importance and hierarchical organization of their imagoes.
Retelling the Story
Cutting down item-bound imagoes helps the person create an overview of complying
and conflicting imagoes. These might have been subconscious before. In the selection
process the person is confronted with which imagoes are currently used for navigation
10
'Ursula Jorch - The Intentional Nomad', entered the 6th of December 11 am,
http://www.ursulajorch.com/blog/2011/who-am-i-without-my-stuff-part-1/

Leon Aahave Uhd
26
in everyday life; as potential imago, past imagoes or imagoes created for building
social capital. By selecting and outlining the most valuable ones, the individual not
necessarily reaches a state of peace, but becomes aware of inconsistency through
conflicting imagoes, and reaches the state of being able to actively choose which
imagoes he wants to gather in a new identity pattern. For the informants the
dispossession process therefore not only counts for physical organization of material,
but helps them reflect on different aspects of their identity. This brings valuable
knowledge to the fore, enabling the individual to actively reflect on potential
inconsistencies in their lives:
"I feel like what it is giving me now is ownership of my life and not just in
a freedom-from-job aspect – that’s sort of a minor, or maybe a medium
part of it, but it is thinking about your life in new ways. And once you
think about how to spend money, I think then, for me, it opened up how I
do a lot of other things, what possessions I have around, the people that I
associate with, and it brought more of my other values to the fore.
(Emily)" (Grigsby 2004:3)
In identifying the most important imagoes and confronting the conflicts between
them, the informants get closer to constructing a personal myth which to a greater
extend succeeds to unify opposing imagoes. The feeling of regaining control
furthermore removes the alienation of identity and creates a sense of ownership. As
an informant puts it:
"…now I feel being me; I only have what I have chosen and I am who I
only want to be (Alison)" (Cherrier 2009:334)
Through the process of dispossession the informants get to re-evaluate their life
situation. By detaching themselves to their possessions, they also are enabled to
detach themselves from imagoes and vice versa. By doing this, they gain an overview
of which imagoes hold the main roles in their lives and which are conflicting. From a
chaotic amount of unconsciously more or less important imagoes they end up relating

Leon Aahave Uhd
27
to few imagoes. Conflicting aspects in their life becomes clearer and available for
examination.
We have now outlined the context for consumerism in western contemporary society,
provided a theoretical frame work for describing practices within it. Finally, we have
analyzed the process of dispossession from the perspective of the individual seeking to
understand why the informants choose to de-clutter, how they experience the actual
dispossession and the outcome.
Discussion
The discussion seeks to answer the question about how freedom is perceived in the
society of consumers. We have decided to investigate the question on two levels:
1. What is the meaning of freedom for the consumer in the society of consumers?
2. What is the meaning of freedom for the simple livers we have investigated?
These two questions leads to our main question in relation to the participants in the
Simplicity Movement:
What are the consequences of living simply within the consumerist society and how
can we understand that from an anthropological point of view?
To have a starting point for discussing freedom we will investigate Bauman's
philosophical understanding of the term in the relation to society and contextualize it
with the theoretical analysis conducted before in relation to Bourdieu.
The “Social” Freedom
According to Bauman freedom is “a social fact, socially produced and socially endowed
with the meaning it happens to carry at a particular time or place” (Bauman 1988:28).
In western contemporary society, he argues, freedom in the form of consumer
freedom takes the role of holding together individual motivation, social integration
and systemic management (Bauman 1988:74). Freedom is therefore a key concept
that must investigated to achieve a better understanding of Bauman’s societal analysis
of liquid modernity.

Leon Aahave Uhd
28
Looking “freedom” up in the Oxford dictionary one finds the following definition: “The
power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint”.
From this definition it follows that external circumstances takes a determining role for
the freedom of the individual. Either, the individual is granted “the right” of being free,
or the individual succeeds in achieving “the power” to exercise freedom. It is on the
basis of this observation of freedom as a social relation Bauman’s definition of
freedom must be understood as power and privilege (Bauman 1988:27). He writes:
"For one to be free there must be at least two. Freedom signifies a social
relation, an asymmetry of social conditions; essentially it implies social
difference […] If being free means a release from ties […], this makes
sense only thanks to the others who are tied, who carry
obligations…" (ibid:9)
His notion of freedom thus becomes one of dualism; for one to be free, another must
be un-free. This does not mean that freedom is a quality that can be possessed by the
individual himself. According to Bauman, defining the existence of freedom only makes
sense in the relation between individuals and groups, signaling and reproducing a
differentiation in status (ibid:7). Through division and separation, freedom thus “sets
the best apart from the rest” (ibid:9).
In relation to the society of consumers we found that the failed consumers consists of
such an opposite to relate to. In the society of consumers this is the group to which the
privileged can confirm themselves their way of living. When it is obvious that a group
does not have the access to the same amount of economic or social capital and
thereby obtaining symbolic power, an affirmation of the freedom emerges.
Bauman argues that when public institutions, social inheritance and religion earlier
assisted the individual in shaping his “life project”, this struggle for being part of “the
best” and exercising freedom becomes the individual life project of today (ibid:41). The
lack of external guide lines leaves the individual free to shape his life – and therefore
he has the full responsibility for success. This social paradox is described by Bauman as
follows:

Leon Aahave Uhd
29
"Everyone has to answer himself the question ‘who am I’, ‘how should I
live’, ‘who do I want to become’ – and at the end of the day, be prepared
to accept responsibility for the answer. In this sense, freedom is for the
modern individual the fate he cannot escape, except by retreating into a
fantasy world or through mental disorder. Freedom is, therefore, a mixed
blessing. One needs it to be oneself; yet being oneself solely on the
strength of one’s free choice means a life full of doubts and fears of
error." (ibid:62)
Understood from this, freedom equals uncertainty and insecurity. The individual can in
this sense be seen as under-socialized (lack of “external guide lines”) and over-
socialized (as the identity is at all time being renegotiated, the core is not “hard”
enough to withstand the influence of external social pressure) (ibid:41). The dualistic
understanding of freedom therefore also counts for security as an opposition to
individual freedom.
Then, as the individual gains freedom in the liquid modern society it also suffers
insecurity. Therefore he seeks alternative guide lines for creating identity and ensuring
social acceptance. Such are found in consumerism where commodities symbolically
expressing identity, can be found and put together in endless combinations. Thus,
when an identity is “chosen” it can be realized (at appearance) by making the
necessary purchases (ibid:63). Even, the advice of life style experts or celebrities
already enjoying social acceptance can be used as a guide line for choosing the “right”
product (ibid:64). This creates an experience of freedom and security in the same time,
and makes consumerism a “fantasy community” where the individual can escape
uncertainty about identity and choice making (ibid:62).
We would like to criticize Bauman for this constructivist idea about freedom in
consumerism since his pessimism towards contemporary society is all but too
apparent. Some consumers are happy and feel they are free when they consume. How
can Bauman then say they are not free? A field is defined as having implicit rules
through the construction of habitus. In the society of consumers there seems to be, as

Leon Aahave Uhd
30
mentioned before, a doxic situation where the rules are reproduced and affirmed by
the agents; thereby creating a coherent experience of freedom. As late anthropologist
Franz Boas says in some of the few anthropological writings on the subject:
“Freedom is a concept that has meaning only in a subjective sense. A
person who is in complete harmony with his culture is free. For this
reason, the concept of freedom can develop only in those cases where
there are conflicts between the individual and the culture in which he
lives”. (Boaz as in Bidney 1967:450)11
In the society of consumers the notion of freedom is so ingrained in the habitus of the
agents that most people do not question if they are free or not. Due to the continuous
consumer actions individuals are affirmed (again in the doxic state of society) in their
feeling of freedom .
In other words the experience of freedom is social, both because the successful
consumers can see themselves as privileged in opposition to the underclass, and
because of the 'harmony' or doxa in the society, which is felt through the construction
of habitus. The consumers who actively participate in consumerism are not aware of a
conflict - they feel free!
This experience is what we will call the social freedom. For the simple livers or de-
clutters on the contrary, there arises a conflict as mentioned through our analysis.
When triggered by a certain event they experience an alienation towards the field and
the construction of their own habitus. They no longer see the doxic situation or
harmony within the society of consumers and on this basis they become un-free.
The “Personal” Freedom
The experience of oppression, anxiety and being un-free emerges with the triggering
event. They suddenly feel inconsistency between habitus and the field, provoking them
to re-negotiate their lives. The informants become aware of the pressure they felt all
along while "being asleep" and following the "consumption machine". They feel an
11
We did not have access to the original material from Boaz since the book is an antique.

Leon Aahave Uhd
31
urge to organize and clarify their values to face the alienation they feel towards
themselves. As Dave Bruno expresses:
"For some time I had been grappling with the negative effects of our
consumer culture – the fact that we, when considered as individuals and
together, are defined in so many ways by material possessions and their
accumulation. I knew I wanted to be free of the pressure that comes with
owning so many things. But it was hard for me to put my finger on what I
was freeing myself from." (Bruno 2010:26)
As it was found in the analysis, dispossession is by the informants used as a powerful
tool to re-evaluate one's current life situation. Furthermore the de-cluttering helps the
informants to identify which imagoes are important to them in their current life
situation, allowing them to consciously and actively renegotiate the questions; ‘who
am I’, ‘how should I live’ and ‘who do I want to become’. To use Bauman's terms, they
resign from the fantasy world of consumerism and take responsibility of answering
these questions. The triggering event makes them realize how consumerism has been
an escape from actively answering these questions as providing some guide lines for
endlessly hunting "the good life":
“…it is by endlessly acquiring the right things that we measure our
distance from the good life. We are getting, but never getting there”
(Bruno 2010:xii)
The statement expresses a feeling of idle; of moving, but never getting anywhere. By
breaking with what is seen as the reproduction of commoditization they engage in re-
defining the good life to themselves. By de-cluttering their material possessions, the
informants not only deal with "the pressure that comes with owning so many things",
but also symbolically organize their imagoes. By doing this they become aware of
creating a physical as well as mental space in which the potential for choosing is
experienced as the potential for new priorities. In an interview with a blogger on
"midway simplicity" Dave Bruno says:

Leon Aahave Uhd
32
"The difficulty that every person who pursues a life of simplicity comes up
with is – once you get rid of all the stuff – what now are you gonna put in
your life? – ‘cause you empty up a lot in your life. You empty up time, you
empty up space in your mind, in your heart and physical space in your
house, relationships, space for relationships… What are you gonna fill
that space up with? Because, just because stuff maybe wasn’t the right to
fill it up with doesn’t mean that… something else might also be a bad
thing to fill it up with…"12
The potential of this spaciousness constitute a clear potential for changing actions,
values and behavior in one's life. By confronting imagoes and choosing which are the
most important ones, also an awareness of conflicting imagoes will emerge. By dealing
with the fewer imagoes left after the symbolical dispossession, the work of creating a
personal myth which to a greater extend manage to unify the personal imagoes
becomes possible.
One of their informants explains how she experienced moving into a small 400 square-
foot house:
"This is the first house that matches our personality. The other houses, I
think they were trying to do more like what you were talking about.
Maybe they were trying to say to the world, “Ken Ewing is a builder and
he can build cool houses” or something. And this is the first house that
we’ve just had fun, we’ve expressed ourselves artistically, and we’ve only
built, have what we need. Not you know, what we think other people
would like. (Mary)" (Cherrier 2007:13).
Mary adds to her description, how she needs to gather strength to disregard her
friends’ unsupportive opinions about the house.
There exists a clear dichotomy in Mary's statement between the houses they have
lived in before and the new house. The new house is associated with fun, being
12
'Youtube', entered 1
st
of December at 6 pm.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKBUGSdqjRc&feature=player_embedded,

Leon Aahave Uhd
33
creative and expressing their personality for the first time. The new house, in
opposition to the previous houses is not trying to be what they "think other people will
like" and expressing to the world that "Ken Ewing is a builder and he can build cool
houses". The previous houses in this sense become a medium for commoditizing
themselves. Anyway, the choice of downshifting is not received well among friends
and thus creates an experience of opposition between creation of symbolic capital and
personal, artistic fun in creating a house which they need.
From this example it seems that the informants distinguish between the “before” and
“after” life, as oppositional. What constitutes this feeling? The “before” was classified
as unconscious following the stream and the search for creating the good life through
commoditization. What is entailed in the process of commoditization is the exchange
of economical capital to social capital. Their focus was set on constructing an identity
on building symbolic capital. Their life was focused on realizing the ‘social’ freedom.
“After” is characterized as “personal realization”, “creativity” and authenticity in
“being the true me”. The feeling of control, the potential of mental spaciousness and
identification of main imagoes is what we will call the ‘personal’ freedom. When
choosing to simplify their life, a clear distinction between the two categories seems to
constitute an opposition from which they classify their values. By mediating between
negative connotations about their life style “before” and positive about the life style
“after” their choice becomes always present through the encounter with the field; the
society of consumers:
"I feel guilty. Twice I stopped shopping there. Once for 2 years and once
for about a year. And really when I bought my house it just got really
hard. I live right next to Wal-Mart, really close at least. I’m up late at
night and sometimes you’ve got to beat the crowds, and it’s easy to go at
1 in the morning and do your shopping there. But yeah, I do feel guilty
bout it. … Some people don’t ever think about consumption and some
people would never go near McDonald’s or Wal-Mart. And I’m
somewhere in between. (Diana)" (Cherrier 2007:25)

Leon Aahave Uhd
34
Downshifting does for the informants mean a reduction in symbolic capital. This
creates some kind of tension between them and their social surroundings. These
people have the means to consume, but chooses not to. They have decreased the
amount of commodities they own and minimized their consumption - but they are still
consuming and taking part in the society of consumers.
Dispossession out of Place
In order to understand this situation we think it is relevant to classify the simple livers
as being in the words of Mary Douglas matter out of place relating to the society of
consumers. Douglas introduces in her book 'Purity and Danger' from 1966 through the
discussion of dirt. She investigates how the notion of dirt relates to a negative
representation of a situation or person that is unwanted and seen as a threat to the
society. They are seen as polluting through the symbol they represents as opposed to
the right conduct which is seen as pure.
"Dirt is the by-product of a systematic ordering and classification of matter, in so far as
ordering involves rejecting inappropriate elements." (ibid: 36).
This distinction must be understood from the importance of classifying and
categorizing. Impressions and experiences and social relations are understood by
categorization. As long as there is a category for things they are harmless, but when
falling outside classification they are seen as a danger or a taboo. Douglas says that:
"Any given system of classification must give rise to anomalies, and any given culture
must confront events which seem to defy its assumptions. It cannot ignore the
anomalies which its scheme produces, except at risk of forfeiting confidence." (Douglas
1984; 40)
Several of the informants quoted in this paper have expressed problems when facing
the greater circle of society who are having a hard time accepting their change of
lifestyle.
As we have shown the society of consumers reproduces the behavior of consuming
goods in order to construct identity. As Bauman outlines the consequences of not

Leon Aahave Uhd
35
adhering to this rule (in special relation to not being able to, due to lack of the
necessary capitals) results in an exclusion of the society. The simple livers are not
lacking the necessary symbolic power through capitals to reproduce the consuming
behavior - they are simply choosing not to. This makes them an oddity in relation to
the society of consumers. They are not failed consumers and they are not successful
consumers - they are something in between.
So the consequence of being a simple liver within the society of consumers is a
situation of living in between. They experience a mediation between two sets of
norms. One which they have been living by and later actively chosen not to comply to -
the society of consumers. Another; their new set of values found through the process
of de-cluttering. By understanding our informants in this light we can explain the
apparent conflicts they are experiencing in relation to their life style. The people
around them do not know how to categorize them. As they are questioning the rules in
the field by their simple living, they become a threat towards other agents' compliance
sense of doxa in the field. Their behavior can be seen as taboo in the society, thereby
estranging the simple livers.
Conclusion
In this paper we have sought to clarify the consequences of simplifying one's life,
through material dispossession. We have accomplished this by investigating the Simple
Living Movement on two levels: First, in relation to society in general, and secondly in
relation to the individual. In order to do this we have used the descriptive frame
presented by Zygmunt Bauman concerning the society of consumers. Bauman's
insights have been contextualized by the theoretical tools provided by Pierre Bourdieu,
enabling us to relate the generalist observations of society with the individual
experience of the simple livers. We found that there is an apparent doxic situation
inside the field society of consumers, in which the rules are reproduced through a
certain kind of behavior. This behavior is determined by the relation between buying a
product and thereby becoming a product oneself. Commoditization as a circular
reproduction of social and economic capital, thus gives the consumers a feeling of

Leon Aahave Uhd
36
consistency within the field. Since there is harmony between the field and the agent
through the construction of habitus, the successful consumer (as opposed to the failed
consumer) does not experience any conflict. As Franz Boas argues, the notion of
freedom only make sense as a subjective matter. We can argue based on these
findings, that the successful consumer experience a 'social' freedom.
What we realized was that this frame work was not adequate to clarify the individual
incentives of the informants who are engaging in the dispossession process. Therefore,
we chose to use the theory of imagoes by Dan McAdams. We argued that imagoes can
be linked to items and therefore takes part in the participants’ identity creation linked
to past memories, potential future scenarios and social desirable appearance. Through
dispossession the participant not only sort materials, but re-evaluate these self-images
seeking to define who they want to be. This sorting of self-images through
dispossession leads to an experience of spaciousness and emptiness as a result of the
reduction from an overwhelming amount of self-images assembled over time to few
actively chosen self-images. The process of dispossession thus becomes a powerful
tool for the informants to re-evaluate one’s life situation. The feeling of control, the
potential of mental spaciousness and identification of main imagoes as a result of this
process is what we call the ‘personal’ freedom.
It is important to note though, that this 'personal' freedom is not necessarily an easy
freedom. The individual is continuously pressured externally by the norms of the
society of consumers, personalized through encounter with family, friends and wider
society. Furthermore, the experience of pressure is magnified internally through the
dispositions in habitus.
This led us to the main question: What are the consequences of living simply within
the society of consumers and how can we understand this from an anthropological
point of view? We answered this question by introducing Mary Douglas and her
investigations into matter out of place. We argued that our informants can be seen as
a threat to the society of consumers, since they do not fit into existing categories; they
have the symbolic power for creating great commoditization of self and thereby

Leon Aahave Uhd
37
achieving prestige within the society of consumers. Nonetheless, they choose not to.
We suggest that their actions are perceived as taboo. Finally, we concluded that, even
though they want to function as simple livers within the society of consumers, they are
met by estrangement.
Suggestions for further investigation
Due to the scope of this paper we have had to prioritize which threads in relation to
the Simplicity Movement that we wanted to follow. We see some obvious areas that
should be further investigated in relation to our findings.
We have used blogs as empirical data in this assignment and in our extensive research
for empirical materials we could see a strong community in the Simplicity Movement
where people shares their concerns in relation to downshifting as well as help each
other in the process. Since, as we suggested, there seems to be an estrangement of
the simple livers in relation to society it could be interesting to see what kind of
community there exists online. In what degree do they relate to each other as a
compensation for meeting silent resistance from society to their practices? Could the
online world be an imagined community where a new field is created with values in
accordance with the Simplicity Movement?
Another aspect that could be of interest is to investigate how especially the economic
threat towards the consumer society from simple livers could be understood. In a
world with a global financial crisis where the discourses on growth solely is seen in
relation to the economic aspects the simple livers definitely presents an interesting
case in relation to the concept of taboo.

Leon Aahave Uhd
38
Bibliography
Ahuvia, Aaron (2005): Beyond The Extended Self: Loved objects and consumer’s identity
narrative. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 32 (1): 171-184
Alexander, Samuel and Ussher, Simon 2012. The Voluntary Simplicity Movement: A multi-
national survey analysis in theoretical context. Journal of Consumer Culture 2012 12: 66-86
Bauman, Zygmunt 1976: Towards a critical sociology: An essay on common-sense and
emancipation. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Bauman, Zygmunt 1988: Freedom. Open University Press. Milton Keynes
Bauman, Zygmunt 2007. Consuming LIFE. Polity Press, Cambridge
Belk, Russel W. (1988): The extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15, No. 2 (Sep.,
1988), pp. 139-168
Bidney, Martin and Bidney, David 1967: Theoretical Anthropology. Transaction publishers,
New Jersey.
Bruno, Dave 2010: The 100 Thing Challenge - how I got rid of almost everything, remade my
life and regained my soul. HarperCollins Publishers, New York.
Bourdieu, Pierre 1994. Raisons pratiques. Sur la théorie de l'action in Af praktiske grunde:
omkring teorien om menneskelig handlen. Hans Reitzel, Copenhagen.
Bourdieu, Pierre 1986. The forms of capital. In J. Richardson. Handbook of Theory and Research
for the Sociology of Education. New York, Greenwood: 241-258.
Bourdieu, Pierre 1974. Tre former for teoretisk viden. in Callewaert et al. : Pierre Bourdieu.
Copenhagen: 72-108
Cherrier, Hélène and Murray, Jeff B. 2007. Reflexive Dispossession and the Self:Constructing a
Processual Theory of Identity. Consumption, Markets and Culture, March 2007, vol. 10: 1–29
Davis, Mark 2008: Freedom and Consumerism. Ashgate Publishing Limited, Hampshire
Douglas, Mary 1984. An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution & Taboo. in Purity & Danger.
Routledge Florence: 30-41
Fromm, Erich 1976: To have or to be? Continuum. London
Fromm, Erich 1980: Flugten fra friheden. Hans Reitzel. København

Leon Aahave Uhd
39
Grigsby, Mary 2004: Buying Time and Getting By. State University of New York Press. Albany
Jacobsen, Michael H and Poder, Poul (2008): The Sociology of Zygmunt Bauman: Challenges
and Critique. Ashgate publishing Limited. Hampshire
Hookway, Nicholas 2008. `Entering the blogosphere': some strategies for using blogs in social
research. Qualitative Research 2008 8: 91-113
McAdams 1993: The stories we live by – Personal myths and the making of self. The Guilford
press. New York.
Schor, Juliet 1998: The overspent American. HarperCollins Publishers, New York
Shankar, Avi and Fitchett, James A. 2002: Having, Being and Consumption. Journal of
marketing management, 18:5-6: 501-516

Bachelor thesis freedom in consumerism

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Bachelor thesis freedom in consumerism

Similar to Bachelor thesis freedom in consumerism (19)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (11)

Bachelor thesis freedom in consumerism