Shop 'til you Drop

I'm afraid I've done it again. I borrowed a book from the library to see if it sounded interesting and ended up reading it all the way through instead of something from my list. I'm sorry.

On the plus side, it was a very interesting book.  I've just finished reading 'Consumed: How Shopping Fed the Class System', the first book by Telegraph journalist Harry Wallop.

Mr Wallop has noticed, like many, that the old definitions of class don't work in the UK any more. The decline of manufacturing and the growth of white collar industries means what we would think of as working class has rapidly shrunk, while the stereotypical layabout lords and ladies have morphed into farm shop managers and tourist attraction owners. Over the past 60 years, disposable income has increased and more and more people have started to consider themselves 'middle class'. Effectively all three labels have been rendered completely meaningless.

Wallop, however, has identified a number of new, more relevant classes.  Whereas the old system was based factors people often have little control over, such as where you went to school, who your family were and how you spoke , Wallop suggests that the biggest identifier of class today is what we buy and where we shop.

In the introduction to 'Consumed', he identifies several new classes; the Portland Privateers, the Wood Burning Stovers, the Hyphen-Leighs, the Sun Skittlers, Middleton Classes and the Asda Mums. Although his list feels incomplete, enough of what he said later in the book rang true to make me think he's actually onto something. And, no, I'm not going to admit which category I fall into, although his analysis was scarily accurate at times!

When someone writes a book on class, it's always a worry that it can become disdainful or judgemental about certain socio-cultural books. Although 'Consumed' did feel a bit so to start off with, possibly because the author comes straight out with his 'upper class' family history, it didn't really last long and by the end the book was at worst tongue in cheek and at best simply fascinating.

In reality, this is a book about marketing and segmentation.  It's a bit chicken and egg - are people slotting into particular consumer groups because of what they're sold or are they sold it because they're in a particular group?  I suppose we'll never know, but it was interesting to read about how shops decide where to open and what ranges to offer. Although I'd noticed that not every supermarket stocks the same lines, I had no idea that some places will never see certain shops because of the socio-cultural groups who live there. I suppose it makes good business sense, but it's still a little scary.

Is class based on shopping better than the old system? On the whole, I think it probably is a step in the right direction. So long as no one starts preventing people from buying items aimed at other 'classes'. But it would be nice to see Wallop's ideas developed further. For example, where does borrowing books from the library fit?

Overall, this is a very interesting, well written book. The author does a great job of balancing readability with raw data, but it does give the book the feel of an extended comment article.  Then again, Wallop is only mooting an idea and doesn't claim to be an anthropologist. I would be very interested to see these ideas picked up and analysed further by academia.  But, in the meantime, I think it's going to be a while before I stop thinking of people in terms of Portland Privateers, Wood Burning Stovers, Hyphen-Leighs, Sun Skittlers, Middleton Classes and Asda Mums!

I look forward to your next book, Mr Wallop. I might even buy that one!

Now, back to Georgette Heyer.

Come Again?

In the preface to 'The Picture of Dorian Gray', Oscar Wilde suggests that "There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book.  Books are well written, or badly written.  That is all."  If ever a book made me think of this quote, it was Ariel Levy's 'Female Chauvinist Pigs'.

'Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture' is polemical work which looks at how women have fallen into the trap of mimicking and idolising either an extreme form of female sexuality (such as the pole dancer, stripper or porn star) or a hard-nosed, aggressive male stereotype (the sort who would oggle pole dancers etc).  Chapters look at the issue from different angles, including the effect on young men and women, it's manifestation in 'boi' culture among New York lesbians and how the author believes the whole issue relates back to consumerism, power and the codification of sexuality.

'Female Chauvinist Pigs'
by Ariel Levy
(Pocket Books, 2006)

There was a lot of really interesting information and ideas in this book, but it is really badly written.  Even looking beyond the fact that no concession seems to have been made for the British market (Levy is an American writer and the book is clearly aimed at someone with a basic understanding of relevant law and events in that country), there's no clear, logical structure or flow to take the reader on a journey through the writer's ideas.  The introduction alone felt rather like an angry, foot-stamping, ranting, tantrum, which was exhausting to read, and, afterall, has anyone ever really had their mind changed by someone shouting at them?

The terrible structure was made all the worse by the fact that there is a lot of really interesting information in this book.  I found the chapters looking at US Feminism and how it led to the 'Rise of Raunch Culture' ('The Future that Never Happened') and the effect of this trend on young people ('Pigs in Training') extremely interesting, but still hard work.  Although the interviews quoted were a great for grounding the subject, ultimately they weren't enough.  More actual statistics would have helped as it was difficult to tell whether the issues discussed were as severe as suggested because so much of the argument felt like it was based on here-say and a very narrow sample of interviews.

This is a book I would love to see rewritten with some more thorough research and better structuring so that it becomes a logical, comprehensible discussion and a cogent argument for reflection and change.  The focus on different groups/topics in different chapters is fine, but how information is conveyed within those chapters really needs looking at.  Unfortunately, until this happens, I'm afraid that wouldn't recommend it to anyone, which is a real shame as I do believe there is a very important issue being discussed here, possibly even the biggest issue in modern feminism.  The trouble is that unless feminists come up with calm, cogent arguments, they can easily be dismissed as hysterical and we'll all be back to square one.