Although over-simplistic in many ways, The Story of Stuff is a very easy-to-follow and an informative explanation of the materials economy--how we get the things we have. From extraction, to production, to distribution, to consumption, to disposal, Annie Leonard describes how a linear system cannot operate indefinitely on a finite planet, and how in the process, we devastate our world, exhaust our resources, and diminish our health. I enjoyed watching it, and think you should as well.
But I would like to address the over-simplification.
Most importantly, there is NOTHING wrong with CONSUMPTION--the problem is with OVER-CONSUMPTION. Personally, I love consumption. If I had to craft my own tampons or knit my own warm clothing or harvest and grow all of my foods, I would not be able to live my life and pursue my own professional endeavors. Consumption creates jobs and time. Over-consumption hampers mindfulness, destroys the earth, et cetera, et cetera.
BUT JUST BECAUSE WE IRRESPONSIBLY OVER-CONSUME, DOES NOT MEAN THAT THERE ARE NOT WAYS TO SENSIBLY AND SAFELY CONSUME. Therefore, the argument needs to be qualified, and over-consumption must be addressed instead of irrationally waging a war against consumption itself--unless we all want to go back to colonial times or earlier--which I don't, nor do I have to in order to help the planet.
Secondly, there is the single view of the corporation as the big, bad, dollar sign. But I have news for you, corporations are highly problematic in many ways that need reform, but corporations still make contraception, tampons, nyquil, paper, pens, and every other essential everyday item and instrument of health care, education and communication needed to live in the modern world.
Thirdly, although there is incredible information on how ideologies of over-consumption are crafted and maintained, that is really only part of the explanation. A brief example (I have finals and cannot blabber): Women are generally larger consumers than men, given all of the cosmetic crap and services (hair, nails, etc.) they consume, and Leonard can talk all she wants about the Eisenhower administration's hand in creating the lifestyle philosophy of buy more more more--but that still does not explain why women would BELIEVE that they NEED these things to be BETTER, or why they would COMPLY to blatantly having to spend more resources than men on appearance--THIS IS WHERE SEXISM COMES INTO PLAY. Why are there different consumption patterns in different economic brackets? Classism can offer insight. After all, there are different cultures of spending that a single read of over-consumption cannot explain, nuance, or complicate.
Monday, December 10, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment