Commodities in Western Society (thought I was going to get an F on this assignment)
The emergence of oil painting as a new artistic style had a tremendous effect on the way in which “spectators” perceived the world around them. While technically this new form of art gave a certain tangible quality to works, oil paintings also began to carry new themes with them- most often being material possession. Art critic John Berger explains the correlation of the emergence of oil painting and the use of this theme in his book, Ways of Seeing. These works, according to Berger, show the spectator sights: “sights of what he may possess” (87). The appearance of this new theme was integral in commoditizing objects- instilling a yearning in the spectator to obtain these things for his own possession. In turn, this newfound importance placed on commodities eventually gave rise to the material culture that dominates Western society today.
Oil paintings made all objects exchangeable. “Everything became a commodity” in these works and thus, spectators began to perceive objects as things that can be bought or sold (Berger 87). While earlier art forms did celebrate the notion of wealth, this wealth was depicted as a “symbol of a fixed social or divine order” (Berger 90). With the emergence of oil painting, however, a new form of wealth, “which found its only sanction in the supreme buying power of money,” began to emerge as a theme in art (Berger 90). According to Berger, the importance of the painting being able “to demonstrate the desirability of what money could buy” was pivotal in perpetuating the increased societal importance placed on commodities (90).
A good example of this concept, as illustrated by Berger, lies in the painting by Hans Holbein, The Ambassadors. This piece depicts two male figures leaning against an ornate shelf filled with a variety of noteworthy possessions- a lute, a metal globe, an atlas, etc. Berger notes that these possessions, located in the center of the painting, relay a “certain amount of information about [the characters’] position in the world” (94). For instance, the navigation tools sitting on top of the shelf were perceived as important due to the events of the time period in which the piece was produced. Intercontinental trade routes were being established to siphon wealth from other continents, specifically Africa, to Europe. Later, these riches were used as capital during the Industrial Revolution (Berger 95). Thus, the prominence placed on these objects awakened an admiration of these figures by spectators. This made the accumulation of these objects extremely respectable and thus, desirable for many to do so.
This appeal of material possession continues even in modern society- often perpetuated through advertising. The advertiser uses, as painters like Holbein did, the appeal of commodities to market their brand. For instance, in the fall of 2009, the designer denim company, 7 For All Mankind, launched an ad campaign that featured two wealthy, young, New Yorkers falling in love. Throughout the one-minute TV-spot, the viewer sees their high-rise studio apartment with all the modern furnishings, their expensive wardrobe (including the brand’s jeans), the nice restaurants they went to on their first and second dates, etc. While the majority of New Yorkers in these characters’ age group do not live such a lavish life, this ad conveyed to the viewer the notion that this type of life is lived by those who buy the brand. Consequently, the viewer may think “if I buy this brand, I will live the same type of life”- even though they may consciously know that simply buying a pair of jeans does not lead to a life of luxury. What is important to understand is the appeal of the commodities in the ad to the viewer and the social importance these characters are perceived to have by possessing these objects. Thus, the spectator longs to obtain them for his or herself to feel important.
Both of these examples demonstrate how significant commodities and the accumulation of such have become in Western society. The status associated with these objects is desired by others to further their sense of self-importance. But what makes these objects different from any other? Why is this pair of jeans that costs $200 different from a pair of non-designer ones that cost around $20? What makes these products different is the power that the individual can obtain from possessing these commodities-the basic premise of consumerism. The object itself is not what is being sold, rather, it is the status that the product gives to an individual who possesses it that appeals to consumers and subsequently furthers the materialistic culture in which we live.