The Sum of Small Things

 
 
The Sum of Small Things
A Theory of the Aspirational Class

by Elizabeth Currid-Halkett

Princeton University Press

2017
 

 

The Sum of Small Things is a sociological study of the consumption habits of what Currid-Halkett calls 'the aspirational class' - a group defined less by their economic situation and more by their education and lifestyle. Her research is based on a national database of consumer spending and interviews with producers and consumers and producers.

 
Currid-Halkett's main argument is that America's cultural elite no longer engage in the same kind of 'conspicuous consumption' of luxury goods as they did in the past and instead focus on new forms of consumption that are less visible but may do more to exacerbate inequality.

 
Currid-Halkett defines the 'aspirational class' as roughly the same group of people as David Brooks' 'bohemian bourgeoisie' or Richard Florida's 'creative class.' More formally, she identifies them based on their receiving higher education, placing a high value on knowledge and acquiring new knowledge, and using knowledge to make the 'right' decisions about consumption. Economically, their income levels vary widely, but to the extent they can afford it, they consume in similar ways. Specifically, they try to spend money on things that are healthy, environmentally friendly, made by fair labor practices, made exceptionally well, or some combination.

 
Currid-Halkett identifies three consumption trends that have largely replaced old-fashioned conspicuous consumption. To the extent that the rich still buy showy luxury goods these days, it's things like watches, boats, and art that are truly out of reach of others. Other luxury purchases tend to be the non-aspirational rich, what Patrick Wyman calls 'America's local gentry.'

 

'Inconspicuous consumption' takes two forms. One is using the 'right' knowledge to buy things that don't necessarily cost more, but demonstrate that you have the 'right' taste. NPR is free, the New Yorker and New York Times cost about the same as others news subscriptions, but they both demonstrate that you're already consuming the correct news and provide the correct takes on a wealth of other topics. Currid-Halkett doesn't mention it, but 'politically correct' speech is probably an example as well. Keeping up with the most polite terminology and the reasoning behind it before it becomes the default mainstream way of saying something (if it ever does) is the very definition of something that costs no money but requires time spent acquiring and deploying a specific type of knowledge.

 
The other form of inconspicuous consumption (and arguably these two shouldn't be combined into one umbrella category) is spending on personal service that other people mostly don't see - housekeepers, nannies, tutors, private tuition, concierge health care. This kind of spending is mostly invisible to outsiders, gives the buyers more free time, improves their quality of life, and entrenches advantages for their children.

 
Conspicuous leisure means spending one's time in ways that don't make money - and indeed may cost a lot of money, or at least require a lot of unpaid time - and are thought to be healthy or improving somehow, like fitness and mindfulness classes. Her biggest examples are the very labor-intensive mothering practices like exclusive breastfeeding, co-sleeping, and attachment parenting.

 

'Conspicuous labor' is probably the most affordable consumption habit for middle-income aspirational class members. This refers to buying more expensive versions of ordinary consumer goods where the extra expense is justified by higher wages for the workers and (maybe) a higher quality of good. What's 'conspicuous' here is a labor process that is transparent, well-documented, and advertised, so that you know where your money is going. Any sort of fair-trade goods, anything 'craft' or 'artisanal,' even paying more to shop on Bookshop.org instead of Amazon.com would be examples.