Understanding Material Culture

Ian Woodward

• Publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd
• Year: 2007
• ISBN:
  9781446239568
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Ciencias sociales
• Subtopic: Sociología

"In his interdisciplinary review of material culture, Ian Woodward goes beyond synthesis to offer a theoretically innovative reconstruction of the field. It is filled with gems of conceptual insight and empirical discovery. A wonderful book."
- Jeffrey C. Alexander, Yale University

"A well-grounded and accessible survey of the burgeoning field of material culture studies for students in sociology and consumption studies. While situating the field within the history of intellectual thought in the broader social sciences, it offers detailed and accessible case studies. These are supplemented by very useful directions for further in-depth reading, making it an excellent undergraduate course companion."
- Victor Buchli, University College London

Why are i-pods and mobile phones fashion accessories? Why do people spend thousands remodelling their perfectly functional kitchen? Why do people crave shoes or handbags? Is our desire for objects unhealthy, or irrational?

Objects have an inescapable hold over us, not just in consumer culture but increasingly in the disciplines that study social relations too. This book offers a systematic overview of the diverse ways of studying the material as culture. Surveying the field of material culture studies through an examination and synthesis of classical and contemporary scholarship on objects, commodities, consumption, and symbolization, this book:

• introduces the key concepts and approaches in the study of objects and their meanings
• presents the full sweep of core theory - from Marxist and critical approaches to structuralism and semiotics
• shows how and why people use objects to perform identity, achieve social status, and narrativize life experiences
• analyzes everyday domains in which objects are important
• shows why studying material culture is necessary for understanding the social.

This book will be essential reading for students and researchers in sociology, anthropology, cultural studies, consumer behaviour studies, design and fashion studies.

PART I

LOCATING MATERIAL CULTURE

---

ONE

The Material as Culture. Definitions, Perspectives, Approaches

---

SUMMARY OF CHAPTER CONTENTS

This chapter introduces material culture studies and demonstrates the usefulness of the material culture approach. It has two main sections which:

• introduce key principles, terms and associated terminologies in the study of material culture
• demonstrate the application of the material culture approach through case studies.

---

Living in a material world

Objects are the material things people encounter, interact with and use. Objects are commonly spoken of as material culture. The term ‘material culture’ emphasises how apparently inanimate things within the environment act on people, and are acted upon by people, for the purposes of carrying out social functions, regulating social relations and giving symbolic meaning to human activity. Objects range in scale and size from discrete items such as a pencil, key, coin or spoon, through to complex, network objects such as an airliner, motor vehicle, shopping mall or computer. Traditionally, however, the term material culture has referred to smaller objects that are portable. Although scholars from a variety of disciplines have studied objects, their uses and meanings since the beginnings of modern social science scholarship, it is only in relatively recent times that the field of ‘material culture studies’ has been articulated as an area of inquiry.

The field of material culture studies (hereafter abbreviated to MCS) is a recent nomenclature that incorporates a range of scholarly inquiry into the uses and meanings of objects. It affords a multidisciplinary vantage point into human–object relations, where the contributions of anthropology, sociology, psychology, design and cultural studies are valued. Material culture is no longer the sole concern of museum scholars and archaeologists – researchers from a wide range of fields have now colonised the study of objects. As well as fostering productive multidisciplinary approaches to objects, MCS can provide a useful vehicle for synthesis of macro and micro, or structural and interpretive approaches in the social sciences. By studying culture as something created and lived through objects, we can better understand both social structures and larger systemic dimensions such as inequality and social difference, and also human action, emotion and meaning. Objects might be seen then, as a crucial link between the social and economic structure, and the individual actor. If we think of the material culture of consumer societies, they are in fact the point where mass-produced consumer objects are encountered and used by individuals, who must establish and negotiate their own meanings and incorporate such objects into their personal cultural and behavioural repertoires, sometimes challenging and sometimes reproducing social structure.

A primary assertion of MCS is that objects have the ability to signify things – or establish social meanings – on behalf of people, or do ‘social work’, though this culturally communicative capacity should not be automatically assumed. Objects might signify sub-cultural affinity, occupation, participation in a leisure activity, or social status. Furthermore, objects become incorporated into, and represent, wider social discourses related to extensively held norms and values enshrined in norms and social institutions. In a complimentary fashion, objects also carry personal and emotional meanings, they can facilitate interpersonal interactions and assist a person to act upon him or herself. For example, wearing certain clothing may make a person feel empowered by altering their self-perception. Objects, then, can assist in forming or negating interpersonal and group attachments, mediating the formation of self-identity and esteem, and integrating and differentiating social groups, classes or tribes.

When studying and accounting for material culture, one needs to keep in mind the relative viewpoints of the analyst and actor. For the analyst to perform a virtuoso analytic deconstruction of any given object is by no means easy, but it is uncomplicated by the idiosyncracies, incoherencies and sheer mundanity of the user’s perspective. Take Barthes’ (1993[1957]) classic essays on aspects of French culture in his book Mythologies as an example. As elegant and instructive as these essays are, one wonders about the equivalence between the manner in which everyday users of such objects perceive them, and Barthes’ sophisticated textual ‘reading’ of them. Furthermore, it is not just a matter of individuals pondering what objects might mean, but individuals reading objects in relation to other individuals within complex intergroup networks patterned by social status and role, and space–time contexts. For the analyst then, the object can be rendered all-powerful, perfectly understandable and historically crucial in the course of any literary reflection. However, once the voice of the user is introduced, clarity and certainty give way to multiple interpretations, practices and manipulations. What was once fixed by analytic measure and conceptual clarity alone melts away.

The current interest in material culture is associated with two key developments in the social sciences: the profusion of research into consumption across a range of disciplines, and the rise of poststructural and interpretive theory. Attention to objects as rudimentary elements of consumer culture has acquired renewed status in socio-cultural accounts of consumption processes in late-modern societies. This interest in consumption objects is also tied up with broader developments in social theory, particularly the so-called ‘cultural turn’. Although social scientists have historically had an enduring concern for the material constituents of culture (Goffman, 1951; Mauss, 1967[1954]; Simmel, 1904[1957]; Veblen, 1899[1934]), the recent interest in objects has developed in the context of prominent socio-cultural accounts of modern consumerism, and in turn, the emphasis these have given to the material basis of consumption processes, and the cultural meanings that colonise such objects as they move through social landscapes (Appadurai, 1986; Douglas and Isherwood, [1996]1979; Miller, 1987; Riggins, 1994). The second development is connected to the general turn toward language, culture, sites and spaces in poststructural social theory, and the associated interest beyond traditional social scientific analytic categories associated with ‘big’ social forces like class, gender and race. Linked with the rise of poststructural theory is an interest in the importance of different variables and sites in social formation and transformation such as the body, space and objects. These approaches don’t ignore social-structural dimensions; however they do consider them in a contextualised, grounded way. As well as interpretive and textual work in the humanities and cultural anthropology (such as Clifford Geertz), the work of Foucault has been of major importance in this development, for it takes social scientists away from studying traditional macro, structural patterns and directs their interest to discourses, technologies and strategies that are applied at the level of ideas, the body, time and space, as techniques for social governance. While Foucault generally ignores questions of meaning and interpretation that are the central focus of the current work, he has made us aware that it is through the microphysics of temporal and spatial organisation that social power and control is both established and challenged. Objects such as the guillotine, the uniform, the timetable, the school writing desk, or the panopticon – which is the central motif in his work Discipline and Punish – are important material tools in the establishment of such capillaries of power, rather than mere ‘props’ or environmental filler.

How can objects be ‘cultural’? A selection of case studies

Having made some preliminary progress, the best way to proceed is to think about objects and culture through practical applications and exemplar cases. This section emphasises the varied capacities of objects to do cultural and social work. In particular, the following case studies demonstrate the diverse capacities of objects to afford meaning, perform relations of power, and construct selfhood. The three sections show how objects can be (i) used as markers of value, (ii) used as markers of identity and (iii) encapsulations of networks of cultural and political power.

Objects as social markers

It is in Bourdieu’s (1984) writing on taste that the idea of objects as markers of aesthetic and cultural value is most thoroughly developed. Bourdieu emphasises the role of aesthetic choice – one’s tastes – in reproducing social inequality. Bourdieu usurped the (Kantian) idea that judgements of taste are based upon objective and absolute criteria by showing that particular social and class fractions tended to have distinctive taste preferences, which amounts to professing a liking for certain objects over others. Moreover, dominant social groups have the authority to define the parameters of cultural value (e.g. notions of what is ‘highbrow’ and ‘lowbrow’ culture), thus devaluing working class modes of judgement as ‘unaesthetic’. In consumer societies where taste becomes a highly visible marker of difference, such judgements are implicated in structures of social position and status. Importantly, aesthetic choice is so thoroughly learnt and ingrained that class markers are expressed in the body, self-presentation and performance. Simple learning of cultural and aesthetic rules may not be enough, as one’s demeanour and comportment (‘bodily hexis’, in Bourdieu’s words) can seldom succeed in betraying one’s class origins.

With this brief overview of Bourdieu’s theory of aesthetic judgement in mind, one can progress to consider the following case studies where objects act as markers of aesthetic value and of self-identity. These cases were gathered as part of a larger project into the narrativisation of aesthetic judgement, which is more fully discussed elsewhere (see Woodward, 2001, 2003; Woodward and Emmison, 2001). Note that it is not just the actual objects these respondents choose to discuss which is important, but also the content of their talk about the object. The object is given meaning through the narrativisation of broader discourses of self, identity and biography, which link aesthetics to ethics of self, and social identity. So, when you read the following case studies, look not just at the what (i.e. the actual object), but the why and how (i.e. the narrative and performative accompaniment) of aesthetic judgement.

---

Helen

For Helen, a chair that sits in a corner of her main bedroom is an object which exemplifies her aesthetic taste. In the research interview, Helen interprets the chair through an aesthetic frame, reflecting on its style and design and how she feels this fits with her self-presentation. Throughout the interview, Helen portrays a high level of aesthetic competence – in Bourdieu’s terms, she has mastered the ‘symmetries and correspondences’ (1984: 174) associated with her choices. As a result, she is able to contextualise her own choices within wider social and aesthetic trends with a degree of high cultural authority, bringing a range of cultural knowledges and expertise to bear on her discussion of the chair.

Helen is someone who places a high value on appropriate home styles and choices, to the extent that she works with an interior designer through important phases of home renovation. Helen and her partner are both professionals in high-salary positions. Helen lives in the inner north east of the city on top of a prominent hill with outstanding views to the city’s east toward the ocean. In terms of questions of taste and style, Helen could be classified as ‘modern classicist’: one who is committed to traditional, classic notions of ‘good taste’ which are based on subtle colour combinations founded in whites and creams, with soft blues and greens as highlight colours. Helen’s aesthetic choices are not directed towards the bright or ostentatious. Rather, decorative schemes are themed consistently through the house, employ neutral-based colours, and present an image of understatement and timelessness that are typically ascribed characteristics of classic ‘good taste’. Asked during the interview to describe her own style, Helen responds:

Pretty minimalist, without being minimalist in terms of futuristic minimalist. I certainly tend to be a … it’s the same with the way I dress, fairly uncluttered, fairly simple, clean lines, certainly very neutral in colours, simple patterns, very classic I guess.

Helen has such a well developed conception of what constitutes her style that she is able to adroitly sum up her aesthetic values through the use of an exemplar object – a chair that stands in a prominent corner of the main bedroom. Helen uses the chair as a prop for her account. The chair – apart from its functional or use value which is not addressed by Helen – is an object that signifies, and summarises, the style of its owner and the desired ambience of the whole house. The chair’s simplicity, neutrality and classical enduring style are instructive:

I can’t see myself ever really taking the plunge and going really bright with the upholstery. As I said, in the main bedroom, come in and I’ll show you, it’s probably the most recent. To me that chair, that sums up my idea. That’s me, I love that. That sort of cream, neutral, New England look.

Helen’s chair then sits as an example, reminding her of the bounds of her own aesthetic variance which she describes as: ‘really simple patterns and simple colours and again very neutral’. There are no serious or problematic issues to be faced in the chair. For example, some may wonder whether investing such importance in this chair is trivial, or overly materialistic. The most challenging issue for Helen is the progressive ‘modernisation’ of her taste and the chance that the chair will no longer fit variations in her style. However, Helen feels that such variations are unlikely to challenge the basic, well-honed values of her modern, classic aesthetic: ‘I don’t think I’ll ever be ultra-modern, but I think I’ll go a little less cottagey’. One of the impressive, important aspects of Helen’s aesthetic value system is the degree to which it is a finely tuned, almost ‘technical’ (Bennett et al., 1999: 56), scheme of knowledge. Its basis is so thoroughly realised in Helen that the nuanced distinctions she makes of shade and style in this piece of material culture are rendered entirely natural.

Christina

The following section turns to a different case altogether, using interview data from the same research project. Christina lives in the same suburb as Helen, though with a less prestigious view, and is approximately the same age (early to mid-30s). However, her aesthetic choices and the reasoning and narrativisation that accompany them, are widely different. Christina has lived in this house, originally the family home, for over 25 years. Now without both parents, the house belongs to Christina and her sister. The house is an architect-designed bungalow built in the late 1940s. Christina’s family was originally from a farming region, and Christina retains a strong affinity for the country despite her privileged private school education, which she now rails against. Christina sets apart her own identity from what she sees as the snob-based culture of most in her suburb to the extent that she has now centred important aspects of her life in different parts of the city:

---

---

Christina (C):	I live my social life in other suburbs, I certainly started off doing the old ‘creek’ ‘hammo’ [Landmark local pubs frequented by upwardly mobile, socially conservative young people] sort of deal … because I went to St Margaret’s, and most of the people were private school around here – we had Churchie boys, we had Grammar next door, we had Churchie [these names refer to elite, ‘private’ secondary schools] down the road, Ascot state school was about as state school as it got … everyone went to Ascot ‘til grade seven and then went off to their private schools at enormous expense … um, that was when I first started but then it didn’t really suit me very much so I sort of moved on to different sorts of people so I hang out at Mansfield [a middle-class, rather unmarkable suburb in the mid to outer zone of the city] suburb these days to tell you the truth …
Interviewer (I): So you have friends out there?
C:	yeah, yeah …
I:	So what sort of activities do you get into, what sort of lifestyle and leisure things do you like?
C:	well … I suppose pretty much the pub sort of scene really, just a few pubs, go to the football a bit, go to the races a bit, I don’t go to the races as much as I used to, that’s more for this sort of crowd. And I do a lot of things on my own really, I just go over there, I’ve got a boyfriend over there and spend a few nights and that’s about it really …
I:	Were your parents more into this scene?
C:	Well, it was a single parent family and mother actually came from out west, but that’s probably why we didn’t jump straight into this, she knew a few people who had country links but she didn’t really know this sort of snob value group here …
This is important contextual material for the aesthetic stance maintained by Christina, which is relatively hostile to conventional concerns about colour, design and style:
C:	I’ve always been totally disinterest...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Preface
• PART I LOCATING MATERIAL CULTURE
• PART II THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO STUDYING MATERIAL CULTURE
• PART III OBJECTS IN ACTION
• PART IV CONCLUSION
• References
• Index