ТОП просматриваемых книг сайта:
Commodification and Its Discontents. Nicholas Abercrombie
Читать онлайн.Название Commodification and Its Discontents
Год выпуска 0
isbn 9781509529841
Автор произведения Nicholas Abercrombie
Жанр Социология
Издательство John Wiley & Sons Limited
Title: Commodification and its discontents / Nicholas Abercrombie.
Description: Cambridge, UK ; Medford, MA : Polity Press, 2020. | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Summary: “Should anything and everything be bought and sold?”-- Provided by publisher.
Identifiers: LCCN 2020012847 (print) | LCCN 2020012848 (ebook) | ISBN 9781509529810 (hardback) | ISBN 9781509529827 (paperback) | ISBN 9781509529834 (adobe pdf) | ISBN 9781509529841 (epub)
Subjects: LCSH: Economics--Moral and ethical aspects. | Economics--Sociological aspects. | Value. | Commodification. | Capitalism.
Classification: LCC HB72 .A24 2020 (print) | LCC HB72 (ebook) | DDC 174/.4--dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020012847
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020012848
Typeset in 10.5 on 12pt Plantin MT
by Fakenham Prepress Solutions, Fakenham, Norfolk NR21 8NL
Printed and bound in Great Britain by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon
The publisher has used its best endeavours to ensure that the URLs for external websites referred to in this book are correct and active at the time of going to press. However, the publisher has no responsibility for the websites and can make no guarantee that a site will remain live or that the content is or will remain appropriate.
Every effort has been made to trace all copyright holders, but if any have been overlooked the publisher will be pleased to include any necessary credits in any subsequent reprint or edition.
For further information on Polity, visit our website: politybooks.com
Acknowledgements
I have spent a long time wondering about writing this book and, as a result, I have accumulated a large number of intellectual debts. For much of that time, over three decades, I was a member of the Lancaster University Sociology Department. From its beginnings, that was a wonderful place to do sociology, creative, free-thinking and democratically run (most of the time). I am particularly grateful to three friends in the department – Brian Longhurst, the late, and very much missed, John Urry, and Alan Warde – who all spent much time discussing the issues with which this book is concerned although they may not recognize the view taken of them here. Lancaster University was also very encouraging of cross-disciplinary work in social sciences and the humanities. As will be obvious to them, this book owes a great deal to the members of the Centre for the Study of Cultural Values, which flourished in the 1980s and 1990s. In particular, I am indebted to Russell Keat, Paul Heelas and the late Nigel Whiteley for many discussions of the relationship between culture, moral principle and the market.
Very many years ago, Stephen Hill, Bryan Turner and I wrote a book called The Dominant Ideology Thesis from which are derived several of the ideas in the present book. I am very grateful to both, not only for that book, but also for a productive collaboration over a dozen years or more and a lasting friendship. More recently, several people have helped with their special expertise. Joe Abercrombie has shared his detailed knowledge of Star Trek, Rob Abercrombie has taught me about the relationship of charitable organizations to the market, Adam Roberts has educated me about science fiction, Andrew Sayer pointed me towards the literature on moral economy, Boyd Schlenther introduced me to work on the sacred, Michael Tichelar spent much time talking about town planning, and John Troyer and Tony Walter of the Centre of Death and Society at Bath University got me started on the human body. Over the period in which I have been writing this book, Bath University has generously provided me with an academic home for which I am very grateful. Four friends – Bren Abercrombie, Richard Little, Michael Tichelar and Linda Watts – have been foolish enough to agree to read the entire manuscript and I am very grateful to them for their friendly advice. Polity’s anonymous readers very kindly and helpfully commented on early drafts of the book. Polity’s staff – Jonathan Skerrett, Karina Jákupsdóttir and Rachel Moore – were uniformly calm, considerate and effective, and Fiona Sewell made a magnificent job of copy-editing the manuscript in a very short time.
Most important of all, Bren has been the perfect best friend for time out of mind – endlessly supportive, quick to make sense out of my ramblings and always willing to help both to talk about the ideas and to wield her publisher’s pen.
1 Money Talk
John Self, the central character of Martin Amis’ novel Money, lives in a world of money, having it or not having it, having a great deal of it but trying to get more, thinking about it and talking about it. Money almost constitutes his world, it seeps into its interstices, it flows, it surrounds in its liquidity. As John Self says: ‘In my day, if you wanted, you could just drop out. You can’t drop out any more. Money has seen to that. There’s nowhere to go. You cannot hide out from money’ (Amis, 2005: 153). But, at the same time, a moneyed world of this kind is unreal. It presents a surface appearance of ease, of luxury, of plenitude. John Self is able fully to indulge his gargantuan appetites for food, sex and alcohol. But underneath this surface, there is both deception and corruption. Self is systematically and intentionally deceived by almost every person he comes across, to the point that he loses all his money. At the same time, the pursuit of his excesses, particularly alcohol, destroys him as a person. There is redemption at the end of the book but that requires the loss of his money together with the realization that money will not buy a life that is morally or spiritually satisfying. Self muses: ‘Maybe money is the great conspiracy, the great fiction. The great addiction too: we’re all addicted and we can’t break the habit now … You can’t get the money monkey off your back’ (Amis, 2005: 384).
Amis’ novel was originally published in 1984, in a period characterized by a strong – and negative – public interest in money. In a single year, 1987, the play Serious Money by Caryl Churchill, the film Wall Street and Wolfe’s novel Bonfire of the Vanities all appeared. But that interest has hardly abated since, especially following the financial crisis of 2008. Not a day passes when there is not a story about money and its misuse in newspapers, on television, in blogs or in social media. There has been a positive deluge of books on various features of the crisis, its causes and consequences (for example, Kaletsky, 2010; Lanchester, 2010; Tett, 2010; Lewis, 2011). Meanwhile, fictional representations of money in novels, plays and films continue to reinforce the sensation that there is a cultural problem in our societies that affects individuals and institutions and that is something to do with money.
I want to refer to all this discussion of money in newspapers, radio, television, film, novels, poetry and popular music as ‘Money Talk’. However, the appearance of Money Talk is not just restricted to these media. It also saturates everyday life. We talk about how much things cost or how much – or little – money we have. We compare our financial circumstances or spending habits with those of friends or neighbours. We speculate on the ways of the rich or the poor. We discuss the use of money by persons and institutions in the public eye. Metaphors, images and sayings involving money abound. We say that ‘the rich get richer and the poor get poorer’, ‘money for old rope’ or ‘in for a penny, in for a pound’. Somebody else has ‘money to burn’ but, on the other hand, ‘money doesn’t grow on trees’. ‘A fool and his money are soon parted’ but ‘money doesn’t buy you happiness’. The very word for money comes in so many different forms in English – dosh, dough, sovs, scratch, mazuma, gravy, spondulicks, bread, wad, moolah, folding green – and these synonyms themselves imply so much behind the simple metaphor, especially in the association of money with food. Much of this Money Talk effectively involves, implicitly or explicitly, moral judgements about human greed, the way that money is used as a yardstick of behaviour or that everything can apparently be bought and sold. These moral judgements are typically hostile; it is the