Please take the time to read this excellent article on The Guardian by Chelsea Fagan on how minimalism is just another new form of consumption.
Anyone who’s ever set foot inside my flat would immediately realise that I’m not a minimalist. I own enough clothes to fill a Primark store, bedsheets, blankets and pillows in a huge array of patterns, colours and designs, posters and photographs on every bit of wall space available. Fagan very rightfully pointed out how the products seen as frivolous are those typically associated with women. Minimalism is a man’s dull domain after all. But I’m not here to talk about that, I’m here to briefly discuss why, somewhat paradoxically, only the wealthy can afford to truly live a minimalist lifestyle. On the outside, this seems ridiculous, after all, isn’t minimalism all about owning less stuff? Yes, but it’s also about owning the right stuff. Fagan highlights this:
‘Being minimalist in this way – “Stop wasting money on all that IKEA nonsense! With this $4,000 dining table hand-whittled by a failed novelist in Scandinavia, you will never need another piece of furniture!” – really just means having enough upfront disposable money to “invest” in your wardrobe and surroundings.’
In order to purchase less items, you need to ensure that the items you do own will last you years, which means paying more upfront. For your home to look like an Apple Store, rather than a mishmash of random pieces of furniture you’re going to have to spend some money for nice products. Surely that sums up exactly what materialism is? How can you claim to be against It when you’re obsessing over expensive products and what to get rid of? Ultimately, your life is dictated by the products you choose to own. It also takes a lot of time to declutter and carefully curate a collection of items you deem worthy. Time that many people just don’t have, especially those working long hours for little pay.
But fundamentally, the reason only the rich can afford to be minimalist is highlighted by this quote:
‘Wealth is not a number of dollars. It is not a number of material possessions. It’s having options and the ability to take on risk.’
Money provides a form of safety. If a wealthy person throws out a product, or it breaks, and they suddenly need a new one, they can immediately buy a replacement there and then. If you don’t have a bank account to fall back on, you can’t afford for an important item to break. So you keep duplicates and back-ups. New laptop for your birthday? Better keep the old one just in case, it doesn’t matter if it ruins the ‘aesthetics’. In addition, people who don’t have a lot of money find comfort in the items that they own, because they understand the work that went into their purchase. A pair of jeans costing £30. That’s almost 4 hours of minimum wage work right there, why would you ever get rid of them, unless they become completely threadbare?
I really like the idea of minimalism and what it stands for, and good for you if you’ve chosen to live this way. But it seems to be that it’s just another trend that pretentious rich people who can’t get enough of and will look down on those who can’t or won’t subscribe to its snobbery.
To sum up, you can keep your boring white-on-white-on-white kitchen and pry my collection of pointless knick-knacks out of my cold, dead hands.
Morven
Komentar