<p>With the disappearance of servitude, the number of vicarious consumers
attached to any one gentleman tends, on the whole, to decrease. The like
is of course true, and perhaps in a still higher degree, of the number of
dependents who perform vicarious leisure for him. In a general way, though
not wholly nor consistently, these two groups coincide. The dependent who
was first delegated for these duties was the wife, or the chief wife; and,
as would be expected, in the later development of the institution, when
the number of persons by whom these duties are customarily performed
gradually narrows, the wife remains the last. In the higher grades of
society a large volume of both these kinds of service is required; and
here the wife is of course still assisted in the work by a more or less
numerous corps of menials. But as we descend the social scale, the point
is presently reached where the duties of vicarious leisure and consumption
devolve upon the wife alone. In the communities of the Western culture,
this point is at present found among the lower middle class.</p>
<p>And here occurs a curious inversion. It is a fact of common observance
that in this lower middle class there is no pretense of leisure on the
part of the head of the household. Through force of circumstances it has
fallen into disuse. But the middle-class wife still carries on the
business of vicarious leisure, for the good name of the household and its
master. In descending the social scale in any modern industrial community,
the primary fact-the conspicuous leisure of the master of the
household-disappears at a relatively high point. The head of the
middle-class household has been reduced by economic circumstances to turn
his hand to gaining a livelihood by occupations which often partake
largely of the character of industry, as in the case of the ordinary
business man of today. But the derivative fact-the vicarious leisure and
consumption rendered by the wife, and the auxiliary vicarious performance
of leisure by menials-remains in vogue as a conventionality which the
demands of reputability will not suffer to be slighted. It is by no means
an uncommon spectacle to find a man applying himself to work with the
utmost assiduity, in order that his wife may in due form render for him
that degree of vicarious leisure which the common sense of the time
demands.</p>
<p>The leisure rendered by the wife in such cases is, of course, not a simple
manifestation of idleness or indolence. It almost invariably occurs
disguised under some form of work or household duties or social amenities,
which prove on analysis to serve little or no ulterior end beyond showing
that she does not occupy herself with anything that is gainful or that is
of substantial use. As has already been noticed under the head of manners,
the greater part of the customary round of domestic cares to which the
middle-class housewife gives her time and effort is of this character. Not
that the results of her attention to household matters, of a decorative
and mundificatory character, are not pleasing to the sense of men trained
in middle-class proprieties; but the taste to which these effects of
household adornment and tidiness appeal is a taste which has been formed
under the selective guidance of a canon of propriety that demands just
these evidences of wasted effort. The effects are pleasing to us chiefly
because we have been taught to find them pleasing. There goes into these
domestic duties much solicitude for a proper combination of form and
color, and for other ends that are to be classed as aesthetic in the
proper sense of the term; and it is not denied that effects having some
substantial aesthetic value are sometimes attained. Pretty much all that
is here insisted on is that, as regards these amenities of life, the
housewife's efforts are under the guidance of traditions that have been
shaped by the law of conspicuously wasteful expenditure of time and
substance. If beauty or comfort is achieved-and it is a more or less
fortuitous circumstance if they are-they must be achieved by means and
methods that commend themselves to the great economic law of wasted
effort. The more reputable, "presentable" portion of middle-class
household paraphernalia are, on the one hand, items of conspicuous
consumption, and on the other hand, apparatus for putting in evidence the
vicarious leisure rendered by the housewife.</p>
<p>The requirement of vicarious consumption at the hands of the wife
continues in force even at a lower point in the pecuniary scale than the
requirement of vicarious leisure. At a point below which little if any
pretense of wasted effort, in ceremonial cleanness and the like, is
observable, and where there is assuredly no conscious attempt at
ostensible leisure, decency still requires the wife to consume some goods
conspicuously for the reputability of the household and its head. So that,
as the latter-day outcome of this evolution of an archaic institution, the
wife, who was at the outset the drudge and chattel of the man, both in
fact and in theory—the producer of goods for him to consume—has
become the ceremonial consumer of goods which he produces. But she still
quite unmistakably remains his chattel in theory; for the habitual
rendering of vicarious leisure and consumption is the abiding mark of the
unfree servant.</p>
<p>This vicarious consumption practiced by the household of the middle and
lower classes can not be counted as a direct expression of the
leisure-class scheme of life, since the household of this pecuniary grade
does not belong within the leisure class. It is rather that the
leisure-class scheme of life here comes to an expression at the second
remove. The leisure class stands at the head of the social structure in
point of reputability; and its manner of life and its standards of worth
therefore afford the norm of reputability for the community. The
observance of these standards, in some degree of approximation, becomes
incumbent upon all classes lower in the scale. In modern civilized
communities the lines of demarcation between social classes have grown
vague and transient, and wherever this happens the norm of reputability
imposed by the upper class extends its coercive influence with but slight
hindrance down through the social structure to the lowest strata. The
result is that the members of each stratum accept as their ideal of
decency the scheme of life in vogue in the next higher stratum, and bend
their energies to live up to that ideal. On pain of forfeiting their good
name and their self-respect in case of failure, they must conform to the
accepted code, at least in appearance. The basis on which good repute in
any highly organized industrial community ultimately rests is pecuniary
strength; and the means of showing pecuniary strength, and so of gaining
or retaining a good name, are leisure and a conspicuous consumption of
goods. Accordingly, both of these methods are in vogue as far down the
scale as it remains possible; and in the lower strata in which the two
methods are employed, both offices are in great part delegated to the wife
and children of the household. Lower still, where any degree of leisure,
even ostensible, has become impracticable for the wife, the conspicuous
consumption of goods remains and is carried on by the wife and children.
The man of the household also can do something in this direction, and
indeed, he commonly does; but with a still lower descent into the levels
of indigence—along the margin of the slums—the man, and
presently also the children, virtually cease to consume valuable goods for
appearances, and the woman remains virtually the sole exponent of the
household's pecuniary decency. No class of society, not even the most
abjectly poor, forgoes all customary conspicuous consumption. The last
items of this category of consumption are not given up except under stress
of the direst necessity. Very much of squalor and discomfort will be
endured before the last trinket or the last pretense of pecuniary decency
is put away. There is no class and no country that has yielded so abjectly
before the pressure of physical want as to deny themselves all
gratification of this higher or spiritual need.</p>
<p>From the foregoing survey of the growth of conspicuous leisure and
consumption, it appears that the utility of both alike for the purposes of
reputability lies in the element of waste that is common to both. In the
one case it is a waste of time and effort, in the other it is a waste of
goods. Both are methods of demonstrating the possession of wealth, and the
two are conventionally accepted as equivalents. The choice between them is
a question of advertising expediency simply, except so far as it may be
affected by other standards of propriety, springing from a different
source. On grounds of expediency the preference may be given to the one or
the other at different stages of the economic development. The question
is, which of the two methods will most effectively reach the persons whose
convictions it is desired to affect. Usage has answered this question in
different ways under different circumstances.</p>
<p>So long as the community or social group is small enough and compact
enough to be effectually reached by common notoriety alone that is to say,
so long as the human environment to which the individual is required to
adapt himself in respect of reputability is comprised within his sphere of
personal acquaintance and neighborhood gossip—so long the one method
is about as effective as the other. Each will therefore serve about
equally well during the earlier stages of social growth. But when the
differentiation has gone farther and it becomes necessary to reach a wider
human environment, consumption begins to hold over leisure as an ordinary
means of decency. This is especially true during the later, peaceable
economic stage. The means of communication and the mobility of the
population now expose the individual to the observation of many persons
who have no other means of judging of his reputability than the display of
goods (and perhaps of breeding) which he is able to make while he is under
their direct observation.</p>
<p>The modern organization of industry works in the same direction also by
another line. The exigencies of the modern industrial system frequently
place individuals and households in juxtaposition between whom there is
little contact in any other sense than that of juxtaposition. One's
neighbors, mechanically speaking, often are socially not one's neighbors,
or even acquaintances; and still their transient good opinion has a high
degree of utility. The only practicable means of impressing one's
pecuniary ability on these unsympathetic observers of one's everyday life
is an unremitting demonstration of ability to pay. In the modern community
there is also a more frequent attendance at large gatherings of people to
whom one's everyday life is unknown; in such places as churches, theaters,
ballrooms, hotels, parks, shops, and the like. In order to impress these
transient observers, and to retain one's self-complacency under their
observation, the signature of one's pecuniary strength should be written
in characters which he who runs may read. It is evident, therefore, that
the present trend of the development is in the direction of heightening
the utility of conspicuous consumption as compared with leisure.</p>
<p>It is also noticeable that the serviceability of consumption as a means of
repute, as well as the insistence on it as an element of decency, is at
its best in those portions of the community where the human contact of the
individual is widest and the mobility of the population is greatest.
Conspicuous consumption claims a relatively larger portion of the income
of the urban than of the rural population, and the claim is also more
imperative. The result is that, in order to keep up a decent appearance,
the former habitually live hand-to-mouth to a greater extent than the
latter. So it comes, for instance, that the American farmer and his wife
and daughters are notoriously less modish in their dress, as well as less
urbane in their manners, than the city artisan's family with an equal
income. It is not that the city population is by nature much more eager
for the peculiar complacency that comes of a conspicuous consumption, nor
has the rural population less regard for pecuniary decency. But the
provocation to this line of evidence, as well as its transient
effectiveness, is more decided in the city. This method is therefore more
readily resorted to, and in the struggle to outdo one another the city
population push their normal standard of conspicuous consumption to a
higher point, with the result that a relatively greater expenditure in
this direction is required to indicate a given degree of pecuniary decency
in the city. The requirement of conformity to this higher conventional
standard becomes mandatory. The standard of decency is higher, class for
class, and this requirement of decent appearance must be lived up to on
pain of losing caste.</p>
<p>Consumption becomes a larger element in the standard of living in the city
than in the country. Among the country population its place is to some
extent taken by savings and home comforts known through the medium of
neighborhood gossip sufficiently to serve the like general purpose of
Pecuniary repute. These home comforts and the leisure indulged in—where
the indulgence is found—are of course also in great part to be
classed as items of conspicuous consumption; and much the same is to be
said of the savings. The smaller amount of the savings laid by by the
artisan class is no doubt due, in some measure, to the fact that in the
case of the artisan the savings are a less effective means of
advertisement, relative to the environment in which he is placed, than are
the savings of the people living on farms and in the small villages. Among
the latter, everybody's affairs, especially everybody's pecuniary status,
are known to everybody else. Considered by itself simply—taken in
the first degree—this added provocation to which the artisan and the
urban laboring classes are exposed may not very seriously decrease the
amount of savings; but in its cumulative action, through raising the
standard of decent expenditure, its deterrent effect on the tendency to
save cannot but be very great.</p>
<p>A felicitous illustration of the manner in which this canon of
reputability works out its results is seen in the practice of
dram-drinking, "treating," and smoking in public places, which is
customary among the laborers and handicraftsmen of the towns, and among
the lower middle class of the urban population generally Journeymen
printers may be named as a class among whom this form of conspicuous
consumption has a great vogue, and among whom it carries with it certain
well-marked consequences that are often deprecated. The peculiar habits of
the class in this respect are commonly set down to some kind of an
ill-defined moral deficiency with which this class is credited, or to a
morally deleterious influence which their occupation is supposed to exert,
in some unascertainable way, upon the men employed in it. The state of the
case for the men who work in the composition and press rooms of the common
run of printing-houses may be summed up as follows. Skill acquired in any
printing-house or any city is easily turned to account in almost any other
house or city; that is to say, the inertia due to special training is
slight. Also, this occupation requires more than the average of
intelligence and general information, and the men employed in it are
therefore ordinarily more ready than many others to take advantage of any
slight variation in the demand for their labor from one place to another.
The inertia due to the home feeling is consequently also slight. At the
same time the wages in the trade are high enough to make movement from
place to place relatively easy. The result is a great mobility of the
labor employed in printing; perhaps greater than in any other equally
well-defined and considerable body of workmen. These men are constantly
thrown in contact with new groups of acquaintances, with whom the
relations established are transient or ephemeral, but whose good opinion
is valued none the less for the time being. The human proclivity to
ostentation, reenforced by sentiments of good-fellowship, leads them to
spend freely in those directions which will best serve these needs. Here
as elsewhere prescription seizes upon the custom as soon as it gains a
vogue, and incorporates it in the accredited standard of decency. The next
step is to make this standard of decency the point of departure for a new
move in advance in the same direction—for there is no merit in
simple spiritless conformity to a standard of dissipation that is lived up
to as a matter of course by everyone in the trade.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />