Journal of Material Culture-2001-Woodward-115-36.pdf

8/12/2019 Journal of Material Culture-2001-Woodward-115-36.pdf

1/23

http://mcu.sagepub.com/Journalof Material Culture

http://mcu.sagepub.com/content/6/2/115Theonline version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/135918350100600201

2001 6: 115Journal of Material CultureIan Woodward

MethodologyDomestic Objects and the Taste Epiphany: A Resource for Consumption

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Journal of Material CultureAdditional services and information for

http://mcu.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://mcu.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://mcu.sagepub.com/content/6/2/115.refs.htmlCitations:

What is This?

- Jul 1, 2001Version of Record>>

at UNIV ESTDL FEIRA DE SANTANA on May 26, 2014mcu.sagepub.comDownloaded from at UNIV ESTDL FEIRA DE SANTANA on May 26, 2014mcu.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://mcu.sagepub.com/http://mcu.sagepub.com/http://mcu.sagepub.com/http://mcu.sagepub.com/content/6/2/115http://mcu.sagepub.com/content/6/2/115http://www.sagepublications.com/http://www.sagepublications.com/http://mcu.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://mcu.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://mcu.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://mcu.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://mcu.sagepub.com/content/6/2/115.refs.htmlhttp://mcu.sagepub.com/content/6/2/115.refs.htmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://mcu.sagepub.com/content/6/2/115.full.pdfhttp://mcu.sagepub.com/content/6/2/115.full.pdfhttp://mcu.sagepub.com/http://mcu.sagepub.com/http://mcu.sagepub.com/http://mcu.sagepub.com/http://mcu.sagepub.com/http://mcu.sagepub.com/http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://mcu.sagepub.com/content/6/2/115.full.pdfhttp://mcu.sagepub.com/content/6/2/115.refs.htmlhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://mcu.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://mcu.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://www.sagepublications.com/http://mcu.sagepub.com/content/6/2/115http://mcu.sagepub.com/


2/23


3/23

Veblen, 1899), the recent interest in objects has developed in the contextof prominent socio-cultural accounts of modern consumerism, and inturn, the emphasis these have given to the material basis of consump-

tion processes (Appadurai, 1986; Douglas and Isherwood, 1979; Miller,1987; Riggins, 1994). This paper has its origin in this current wave oftheoretical research into objects, but looks to fuse issues of methodologywith the established theoretical perspectives in studies of tastes andmaterial culture. It addresses methodological issues related to theprocess of data collection and interpretation, paying particular attentionto the reflexive negotiation of narrative in the face-to-face interview. Thisis a basic issue for studies of consumption, for despite the fact that theframework and assumptions of the material culture approach are welllaid out in the aforementioned literature, important questions related to

methodology have not been thoroughly explicated. This paper arguesthat the methodological perspectives of narrative analysis (Denzin,1989a, 1997; Riessman, 1993) and social accountability theory (Shotter,1984), and Denzins idea of epiphany (Denzin, 1989a, 1989b) are usefulresources for understanding how taste and aesthetic choice are accom-plished phenomena; created and managed through talk about pivotal, orepiphanic objects.

This paper applies the theoretical motif of the object in order toinvestigate the narratives used to accomplish decisions of taste and aes-

thetic choice in homes. The material culture framework has been chosenfor two reasons. In the first instance, the domestic objects considered inthis paper were focal points within interviews conducted with a sampleof householders. Because of this, they can be seen as epiphanic orpivotal objects. Denzin has argued for the value of studying epiphaniesas a component of biographical ethnography to describe problematicexperiences, or turning-point moments, which in turn act as narrativeresources for people to account for crises or changes in their lives(Denzin, 1989a: 6971, 1989b: 1519). Because they are framed as a

problematic or crisis experience, epiphanies are held to be an effectiveway for researchers to capture significant events in the lives of respon-dents. They are told as turning points in peoples lives, and are thus con-venient resources for the researcher to construct meaningful accounts ofidentity and action. The objects interviewees talk about in this projectcan be seen as minor epiphanic objects. While choosing, purchasingand displaying the domestic objects considered in this paper do not rep-resent crises or turmoil in the way Denzin originally applies the termepiphany typically, events such as breaking free from addictions, poor

relationships, or more generally taking charge of ones life they arepivotal for the production of what is seen as a culturally warrantable(Denzin, 1989a: 77) taste narrative. A narrative is culturally warrantablewhen it can be told and heard as true or convincing by participants. It

Jo u r n a l o f M ATER I AL CU LTU RE 6 ( 2 )

116

at UNIV ESTDL FEIRA DE SANTANA on May 26, 2014mcu.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://mcu.sagepub.com/http://mcu.sagepub.com/http://mcu.sagepub.com/http://mcu.sagepub.com/


4/23

thus involves mastery of various discursive strategies. In all but one casereported in this paper, the objects were introduced as a topic for dis-cussion by the interviewee. In the remaining case, the object was raised

as a topic of interest by the interviewer because of its spatial prominence.Interview data about domestic objects are used as a device to groundinvestigation of taste and aesthetic decisions. Talking about taste andaesthetic choice with people in their homes offers opportunities forexploration of cultural, emotional, and aesthetic meanings that can bemanifested in domestic objects. This methodology stands in contrast tostudies of objective tastes, best represented by Bourdieus Distinction,which take mapping the social distribution of aesthetic and culturalpreferences as the principal aim of sociological studies of taste. Thestudy of objectified tastes preferences in music, art and literature

amongst other forms of culture is well established in sociologicalstudies of taste, in contrast to interpretive studies of taste narrative,which is the primary interest of this paper.

The recent focus on the material object in consumption studies canbe situated more broadly in the consumption studies literature. Investi-gation of consumption processes at the level of the object notably theepiphany object has the advantage of directing attention to themeaning and consequence of the thing being consumed, rather than apreoccupation with theoretical, ideological questions concerning the via-

bility and authenticity of consumer practices. This re-orientation entailsa significant shift. The approach to theorizing consumption processesthat was foundational in the sociology of consumption has arisenthrough theoretical frameworks generated by the core motifs of con-ventional sociological practice: constraint and opportunity, or moregenerally, activity and passivity. Broadly, questions of consumer con-sciousness, the political nature of consumerism and the relative powerof the consumer vis--vis the structural forces of capitalism have beenthe primary concern for this approach. The principal feature is the pos-

itioning of consumption within a social context; informed by an under-standing of issues such as media, marketing and social class. Theorganizing themes which frame consumer practice are centred onnotions of political and economic power, choice and constraint. At anabstract level, they are grounded broadly in sociological questions ofagency and structure. This reliance on dichotomous theoreticalmetaphors is what led Daniel Miller (1995) to summarize this type ofsociology of consumption as encouraging the reductionist myth that con-sumerism was either good or bad, rather than a complex, discursive

process. The lineage of these approaches can be traced from Marx, andthrough 20th-century varieties of critical thought such as Lukcs,Marcuse, and Horkheimer and Adorno.

In contrast, the object turn in studies of consumer culture transfers

Woodward:DOMESTI C OB J ECTS AND TH E TASTE EP I PHANY

117



5/23

attention to the intrinsic materiality of many consumption processes.Particularly, it has suggested a role for objects in generating culturalmeanings; in doing social and cultural work through processes of

differentiation, objectification and integration (Appadurai, 1986; Baud-rillard, 1996[1968]; Douglas and Isherwood, 1979). While the materialculture approach to consumption retains a concern for consumer prac-tice and ideation as the foundational studies of consumption had pre-viously emphasized it devotes particular attention to the object ofconsumer interest as the visible part of culture (Douglas and Isher-wood, 1979: 44) which serves to animate practice, or evoke feelings, inconsumers. Because it both broadens and empiricizes the analytic focus,the material approach to consumerism is able to fruitfully address issuesof practice and relations between people and consumer objects

(Emmison and Smith, 2000).

PERSPECTIVES ON MATERIAL CULTURE: OBJECTS,

SIGNS AND CULTURE

There are two principal theoretical paradigms which should not formmutually exclusive, or antagonistic, analytic frameworks for theinterpretation of consumer objects: one based in semiotics, whichemphasizes the ability of objects to represent or signify something in

social discourse; the other in cultural anthropology, which focuses onwhat people do with objects and the ways in which objects are cultur-ally embedded in social relations. The object-signifier approach to con-sumer objects has its origins in the critical semiotics of Roland Barthes(1993[1957]), whose analyses of a burgeoning modern consumer societyseems to have inspired the semio-structural analyses of commodity-signsfound in Baudrillards (1996[1968], 1981) earlier works (Gottdiener,1995: 39; Kellner, 1989: 26). While Barthes Mythologiesworks to exposethe ideological abuse hidden in the decorative display of the new

jewel-like objects of consumer society (1993[1957]: preface), and as suchis a good example of the semiotic approach to objects, it is his analysisof the system of the structural codes of fashion (1967) which seems mostimportant in framing the sign-based account of domestic objects under-taken by Jean Baudrillard. Baudrillards concern for a sociological analy-sis of interior design in The System of Objects(1996[1968]) is predicatedon an assumption about the nature of modern objects that is furtherdeveloped in his later work on the political economy of commodity signs:Objects never exhaust themselves in the functions they serve observes

Baudrillard (1981: 32); meaning that the objects we surround ourselveswith have value greater than strict functional utility. On the one hand,objects are simply expendable resources, a certain utility is constitutedin particular objects that is immediately apparent and transparent; and


118



6/23

on the other, objects are signifiers whether it be beauty, prestige, statusor difference. In his political economy of sign value, Baudrillard (1981:29) goes on to reject the explanation of objects founded in terms of use

value as a realist or empiricist hypothesis. Instead, he moves to advancea basic proposition that was substantially operationalized in BourdieusDistinctionby asserting that an accurate theory of objects will not beestablished upon a theory of needs and their satisfaction, but upon atheory of social prestations and signification (1981: 30).

Baudrillards work on consumerism and the structural logic of valuein consumer society laid significant groundwork for broader conceptu-alizations of postmodernity, and seems especially influential in the con-sequent generation of theoretical observations about the nature ofconsumer practice in that epoch. For example, Baudrillards definition

of consumption as an activity consisting of the systematic manipulationof signs (1996[1968]) is an important early claim regarding the use ofobject-things by bricoleur-like consumers to signify aspects of self, whichhas been taken up by contemporary theoreticians concerned with thenature of consumerism in postmodernity (Featherstone, 1991: 67;Giddens, 1991: 198; Lash and Urry, 1994: 61). While in these early worksBaudrillard demonstrates an awareness of how his object-signifieraccount was a preliminary stage of the analysis of objects (1981: 35)and that the more important role for objects was as scaffolding for a

global structure of the environment (1981: 35), the course of his intel-lectual interest seems to have precluded a further contribution to a socio-logical analysis of domestic interiors.

While related work in the sociology of consumption is predicated onthe symbolic use of consumption to establish difference, manage statusand denote extravagance (Barthes, 1993[1957]; Bourdieu, 1984;Goffman, 1951; Veblen, 1899), accounts of consumer objects have notfocused solely on semiotic capacity. Much of the recent work in culturalanthropology has drawn attention to the culturally embedded nature of

consumption objects; that is, the social and emotive capacities of objectsthat people acquire and use (Douglas and Isherwood, 1979; McCracken,1988; Riggins, 1994). Along similar lines, research by environmental psy-chologists and consumer researchers has analysed the way materialobjects facilitate self-cultivation (Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton, 1981) through psychological processes of attachment, integrationand differentiation (Belk, 1988; Dittmar, 1992; Schultz et al., 1989).Unfettered from the baggage associated with the myths of consumption(Miller, 1995), this body of research has laid useful groundwork for a

sociological conception of the material aspects of consumerism. Byincorporating theory from cultural anthropology and environmentalpsychology, it enriches the structural account of objects presented byBaudrillard (1996[1968]), and the class-dependent account of cultural


119



7/23

consumption elaborated in Bourdieus (1984) model of social space. Inthis broadly cultural approach, objects retain importance as signifiers,however the process of signification is embedded in the context of social

and cultural meanings, rather than existing autonomously within a struc-tured system of signs.Douglas and Isherwood (1996[1979]) have provided what stands as

probably the most systematic treatment of the nature of goods as cul-tural props. They acknowledge that while goods, or consumer objects,originate in the system of capitalist production, at the same time allmaterial possessions carry social meanings and, as resources for think-ing, commodity-objects make visible and stable categories of culture(1996[1979]: 38). As something for making sense of the world, consumerobjects assist people in demarcating social categories and thus assigning

worth and value to things and people (Douglas and Isherwood,1996[1979]; Douglas, 1996). Daniel M illers (1987) programme formaterial culture studies argues similarly for studies of consumption thatacknowledge relations between people and goods in industrial societies.Miller switches the frame of analysis from the economic realm of objec-tification, to the process of consumer objectification. One of Millerssignificant arguments centres on the important work consumers do increating meaning from goods in industrial modernity, and in particularhe emphasizes the semiotic and cultural labour involved in, and after,

the purchase of commodities (see also Miller, 1998). It is in this periodof time when a vast morass of possible goods is replaced by the speci-ficity of the particular item that is chosen, and subsequently purchased(Miller, 1987: 190). The abstractions of production and exchange empha-sized in structural accounts of consumption are replaced by the con-sumers search for meaning:

. . . consumption as work may be defined as that which translates the objectfrom an alienable to an inalienable condition; that is, from being a symbolof estrangement and price value to being an artifact invested with particu-

lar inseparable connotations. (Miller, 1987: 190)

THE HOME AND OBJECTS

Because of the peculiar nature of domestic space, particularly the waypublic and private space is distributed within the home, an analysis ofdomestic objects must consider both the socio-semiotic approach and thesocio-cultural approach to objects. The home is an important special casein material culture studies. Domestic spaces are not exclusively public

or private, as such meanings shift according to the social and familiallocation of visitors to the spatial organization of the home. Domesticobjects, too, serve shifting purposes; an issue that requires applicationof both the semiotic and cultural approach to objects. The semiotic value


120



8/23


9/23

world (Riggins, 1994: 101), it is a useful site for examining the relationsof individuals to their desired tastes and home ideals, and the expressionof identity (see also Altman and Gauvain, 1981; Laumann and House,

1970).

HOUSEHOLD OBJECTS AND THE ACCOUNTING

PROCESS SOME CASES

This paper uses four case studies of domestic objects, selected from alarger project of interviews with householders. The project from whichthese cases are taken is set in the city of Brisbane, capital of the state ofQueensland, Australia (Pop. 1.5 million). The cases reported here arewith participants in a middle to high socio-economic position. The

suburbs they live in are near-city, older suburbs, with generally older,renovated housing. These neighbourhoods contain some of the citysmost prestigious housing. Using face-to-face interview extracts as data where householders talk about epiphanic, pivotal objects in their lives aspects of the relations between people and household objects areelaborated. In the discussion which follows, I consider each case in turn,then seek to evaluate the way studies of epiphanic objects can contributeto accounts of consumption and taste cultures, pointing to the develop-ment of an account of taste based in the practical aesthetics of contem-

porary material culture. This involves an examination of certainmethodological issues associated with using domestic objects to accountfor aesthetic preferences.

1. ANNAS OVEN

Annas oven is a contentious, problematic object. Its polysemic nature a combination of matters which seem to relate to style, context, priceand role necessitates much work by Anna to convert the oven to some-

thing which can sit naturally and comfortably in her home. Annas talkabout the oven demonstrates the way aesthetic choices can relate topolitical values as well as to the functional nature of objects; and howobjects can offer frames through which the nature of household relationsis clarified.

First however, it is important to situate Anna in a social context.Around 50 years old, Anna is a university tutor and project manager inthe social work department of a large university. She has dual under-graduate degrees and a postgraduate qualification in social science. Anna

is therefore well acquainted with the practice of social scientific researchand also importantly, with some of the broad controversies that surroundsocial theories of consumerism. Anna lives in a large colonial house situ-ated on an elevated position in the inner-west of the city. The house is


122



10/23

fronted by a cottage garden decorated with a pond and statue, and awinding gravel path. The garden has a range of established shrubberywhich denote history or age, planted in a classic romantic cottage style,

and including standard roses, old grape vines and large azalea shrubs.We can see her expertise in these fields in her standpoint on the stain-less steel, European oven that sits centrally along one wall of her newlyrenovated kitchen.

Annas kitchen has recently been renovated, and thus became afocus for the start of our interview. The task of balancing new, glossysurfaces with the traditional structures and materials inherited with thehistoric home has been a chief goal for Anna, and her notion of what isaesthetically acceptable hinges on generating this balance:

. . . we struggled over the style because we wanted it to fit in with the house,which is 120 years old, um . . . so we wanted the benefits of modern tech-nology with a sympathy with the house, we ended up with the woodencupboards and um . . . mimicking the old safe doors, to break that totaltimber look with the stainless steel benches which are pretty utilitarian, butstill I think actually blend in . . . I think it goes really well with the timberas well as being utilitarian, so its not just utilitarian its the look that itcreates which is a blend of sort of modern practicality with traditional style.

The epiphany object in question here, the oven, is modern in appear-ance; though its straight, solid styling also allows it to signify a sense ofclassicism and authenticity above and beyond its stainless steel shine. Itis a large European-brand oven, priced at several thousand dollars, madein stainless steel and glass. The style of the oven is currently fashion-able, though not yet widely popular because of its cost and size, and theindustrial connotations some consumers may assign to it. I ts shape andlack of decorative parts suggest an economy of design: an elegant sturdi-ness; but, its make and materials denote European standards (seen fromthe perspective of the Australian consumer). This is an oven for those

who are aware of the aesthetics of food preparation and the role ofcooking equipment in preparing good food. But rather than focus on itsaesthetic qualities and status signifying capacities, in the followingexchange Anna represents her new oven through a range of frames,many of which are non-aesthetic. What is apparent through thisexchange is the psychic work invested in the incorporation of the com-modity object into a system of meaning that is subjectively experienced,but built upon relationships at a range of social levels:

Anna (A): Its almost kind of like an art piece because visually you see itcoming through that open space, and it fits in with the house, and I guess itsays something fairly traditional, not necessarily that I espouse completelyto those ideals.


123



11/23

Interviewer (I): What message does it send?

A: Well, I guess something about the relationship of food and household,and thats involved in nurturing . . . theres a lot of debate about that actually

. . .

I: What about?

A: Well my partners very . . . has a high input into domestic decisions whichis fairly unusual I gather after talking to the people who sell commodities,theyve had to take a negotiating role . . .

I: So what i s the debate about?

A: My partner liked it, he wanted it more than I did, I said, like I dont cookenough to justify this kind of oven, does this mean that youre going to cook?

I: So did he see it as an art piece?

A: No, I see it as an art piece because I dont use it enough to justify it.

I: How do you feel about an oven being commodified as an ar t piece?

A: To me, its just a pragmatic resolution of ok, Im not going to hang on tothis one, and its really nice looking and we do use it enough.

I: What sort of oven would you have gone for?

A: Something out of sight . . . something smaller . . . but considering thepragmatics that this is a fairly large space, I mean if were going to use it,then it does balance the space and something smaller would look ridiculous. . . so against that Ive got my sense of balance and space . . . those sorts ofthings are pretty important as well as whether something is utilitarian oruseful, beautiful or . . .

I: So you l ik e the styl ing and the look?

A: Yeah yeah, its just really if I spend that theres a pressure to . . . youknow, and I dont see myself as someone traditional who spends a lot oftime cooking every night, but on the other hand I do have a bit more timenow and were spending more time um . . . creating meals that are attract-ive and more of an art form than something just to eat.

Through the course of this exchange we see both Anna, and theinterviewer, seeking an understanding of how the oven is interpretedby Anna. There is no straightforward answer, because the oven ispivotal in Annas account of the aesthetic, spatial and economic issuesinvolved in renovating the kitchen. In her first statement on the oven,Anna confirms that the aesthetic qualities of the object are critical by

suggesting the oven is kind of like an art piece. However, this sparksa range of other issues to be addressed, before Anna returns to her per-ception of the aesthetic qualities of the oven at the end of the extractthrough ideas about spatial balance, scale and beauty. Through the


124



12/23

middle of the extract, and thinking through her ideas about the object,we can see where Anna problematizes the purely aesthetic nature ofthe oven. She identifies how the oven is placed within political issues

related to gender roles in the family associated with nurturing anddomesticity, and how choosing the oven involves aspects of compromiseand power that need to be reconciled within her own relationship. Thecrucial point to emphasize here is the way Anna thinks through theobject in the course of the conversation as an epiphany object, it isdeployed by her to explain and account for a range of important issues.By weighing-up alternative accounts and meanings for the researcher,Anna provides a narrative context for the object, and accomplishes herpersonal account of taste within the setting of the research interview.The epiphanic object allows Anna control of her narrative through the

deployment of a concrete example, and in turn, emerges from the inter-view as a key resource for the researcher to offer a synopsis of hernarrative.

2. HELENS CHAIR

For Helen, a chair that sits in a corner of the main bedroom is anepiphany object. Helen reports it as a relatively straightforward exem-plar, free of the problematic status of Annas oven. The chair is inter-

preted by Helen through an aesthetic frame, and provokes her to reflecton its style and design. This does not mean Helens account of the chairis less sophisticated than Annas reflection on the oven, only that theexistential issues, which surfaced in Annas talk about her oven, are notapparent. Partly, this difference may come back to other social charac-teristics. Throughout the interview, Helen portrays a high level ofaesthetic competence in Bourdieus terms, she has mastered thesymmetries and correspondences (1984: 174) associated with herchoices. She is someone who places a high value on appropriate home

styles and choices, to the extent that she works with an interior designerthrough important phases of home renovation. Helen and her partnerare both professionals in high-salary positions. Helen lives in the inner-north-east of the city on top of a prominent hill with outstanding viewsto the east.

In terms of questions of taste and style, Helen could be classified asmodern classicist: one who is committed to traditional, classic notionsof good taste which are based on subtle colour combinations foundedin whites and creams, with soft blues and greens as highlight colours.

Helens aesthetic choices are clearly not directed towards the bright orostentatious. Rather, decorative schemes are themed consistently throughthe house, employ neutral-based colours, and present an image of under-statement and timelessness that are typically ascribed characteristics of


125



13/23

classic good taste. Asked during the interview to describe her own style,Helen responds:

Pretty minimalist, without being minimalist in terms of futuristic minimal-

ist. I certainly tend to be a . . . its the same with the way I dress, fairlyuncluttered, fairly simple, clean lines, certainly very neutral in colours,simple patterns, very classic I guess.

Helen has such a highly developed conception of what constitutesher style that she is able to adroitly sum up her aesthetic values throughthe use of an exemplar object a chair that stands in a prominent cornerof 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 addressedby Helen is an object that signifies, and summarizes, the style of its

owner and the ambience of the house. Its simplicity, neutrality andclassical enduring style are instructive:

I cant see myself ever really taking the plunge and going really bright withthe upholstery. As I said, in the main bedroom, come in and Ill show you,its probably the most recent. To me that chair, that sums up my idea. Thatsme, I love that. That sort of cream, neutral, New England look.

Helens chair then sits as an example, reminding her of the boundsof her own aesthetic variance which she describes as: really simple pat-

terns and simple colours and again very neutral. Unlike Anna and hernew oven, there are no serious problematic issues to be faced in thechair. The most challenging in Helens terms is the progressivemodernization of her taste and the chance that the chair will no longerfit variations in her style. However, Helen feels that such variations areunlikely to challenge the basic, well-honed values of her modern, classicaesthetic: I dont think Ill ever be ultra-modern, but I think Ill go alittle less cottagey. One of the impressive, important aspects of Helensaesthetic value system is the degree to which it is a finely tuned, almost

technical, scheme of knowledge (Bennett, Emmison and Frow, 1999:56). Its basis is so thoroughly realized in Helen that the nuanced dis-tinctions she makes of shade and style in material culture are renderedentirely natural.

3. CHRISTINAS WARTISHOG

Christina lives in the same suburb as Helen, though with a less pres-tigious view, and is approximately the same age (around 30). However,

her aesthetic choices and the reasoning behind them, are widely differ-ent. Christina has lived in this house, originally the family home, for over25 years. Now without both parents, the house belongs to Christina andher sister. The house is an architect-designed bungalow built in the late


126



14/23

1940s. Christinas family was originally from a farming region, andChristina retains a strong affinity for the country despite her privilegedprivate school education, which she now rails against. Christine sets

apart her own identity from what she sees as the snob based culture ofmost in her suburb to the extent that she has now centred importantaspects of her life in different parts of the city:

Christina (C): I live my social life in other suburbs, I certainly started offdoing the old creek hammo sort of deal . . . because I went to StMargarets, and most of the people were private school around here wehad Churchie boys, we had Grammar next door, we had Churchie down theroad, Ascot state school was about as state school as it got . . . everyone wentto Ascot till grade seven and then went off to their private schools atenormous expense . . . um, that was when I first started but then it didnt

really suit me very much so I sort of moved on to different sorts of peopleso I hang out at Mansfield these days to tell you the truth . . .

Interviewer (I): So you have friends out there?

C: yeah, yeah . . .

I: So what sort of activit ies do you get into, what sort of l ifestyle and leisure thingsdo 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 dont go to the races asmuch as I used to, thats more for this sort of crowd. And I do a lot of thingson my own really, I just go over there, I ve got a boyfriend over there andspend a few nights and thats about it really . . .

I: Were your parents more into thi s scene?

C: Well, it was a single parent family and mother actually came from outwest, but thats probably why we didnt jump straight into this, she knew afew people who had country links but she didnt really know this sort ofsnob value group here . . .

This is important contextual material for the aesthetic stance main-tained by Christina, which is relatively hostile to conventional concernsabout colour, design and style:

Ive always been totally disinterested in dcor, I dont care as long as theresa seat, a kitchen and a bed, thats all I really care about (I : so you dont havean interest in it ?) no, dont care, really dont care . . . I like clean, I like neat,but I dont care if it sort of clashes or whatever.

Christina moves to distance herself from mainstream ideas abouttaste and style, on the basis of its elitist nature, its lack of person-centredauthenticity, and its perceived lack of relevance to her key leisure inter-ests: cable television, pub culture, football and clothes shopping. This


127



15/23

anti-style position is reflected in one of the objects Christina chooses todiscuss in our interview the wartishog:

Im a bit of a wood girl, and I can show you another piece that I like Ill

bring it to you . . . I got this over in Africa for $50, and one of my friendsdid it up for me . . . I like the warthog, my cousins been living in Africa forabout seven years, we just went over there I think it was two years ago anddid a driving holiday around South Africa and it was just in one of thosereserves, its really a game park, a lot of them carve them, but he was justa really good piece . . . but not finished, totally unfinished, that sheen, thefinish has been done since Ive been back, which has made it come up awhole lot better . . . hes just unique, everyone goes ughhh . . . whatsthat!!! . . . wartishog . . . I sort of like oddities I suppose, something that noone else has got thats a bit weird you know . . . not because its really

expensive but because its a bit weird . . . its unique, youre not going tofind things like that in many houses in Hamilton, are you?

As an epiphany object the wartishog seems to have been chosenpartly for its perceived lack of conventional beauty or fashionability for its aggressively anti-style position. Seen in this context, Christinaadopts a strong political attitude toward conventional prescriptions oftaste, which has its origins in an anti-fashion outlook. At the same time,Christinas stance is display-oriented, because of its emphasis on theshock-value of the object that is manifested through its perceived

strangeness. The sign-value of the object for Christina is thus not basedin conventional standards of beauty or taste. Its value lies in the samedomain as other status objects, but obtains its currency through differ-ent signifiers: physically shocking rather than refined and understated,provocative rather than calming, aggressive rather than peaceful. Inaddition, it is apparent that the wartishog is strongly associated withChristinas experiences of travel, family and friends. It is an exotic object(Riggins, 1994), linked to a specific touring experience and the contactswith friends and family involved in such travel.

4. JULIES BIG BLUE

In a home heavily invested with objects, Julie chooses her big blue vaseas her favourite. The big blue vase is positioned for maximum exposure,on a display bench adjacent to the entrance foyer of her home. Julieshome is near new, though it is located in a prominent position in an estab-lishment part of the city. Like an increasing number in her area, Julieand her husband purchased an old home as a way of buying into the

suburb, demolished it, and constructed their new home. Attracted by thesuburbs prominent, prestigious position, this group of gentrifiers whodemolish older dwellings and build new homes in contemporary, popularstyles is the subject of debate in the area. While grand colonial-style


128



16/23

houses retain long-lasting popularity in the suburb, more recent post-warhomes tend to be removed by incoming well-resourced builder-occupiers.As reported by a range of participants in this study, there is debate

amongst residents that revolves around the aesthetics of the suburbssecond generation architecture, and the transformational power of thebuilder-gentrifiers new-money.

Julie took on planning and supervising the building of her home asa material contribution to her relationship, in her words she was doingher bit. The plan for her house involved Julie and an architect makingalterations to a home plan called the Aqua Bella. The public and livingareas of Julies home, occupying the ground floor, are full of a range ofexotic objects, status objects (Riggins, 1994) and relational objects. Manyhave an exotic flavour which reflects the international nature of her

husbands work as an advertising executive: Chinese peach wood furni-ture (I mean you dont get anything like that here unfortunately), 1813Northern China pewter, marble statues in international hotel style, acarved Asian dragon drum, a Pakistan rosewood table setting, and a1920s English oak dining table. And amongst this surfeit of objects isJulies favourite the big blue vase:

Interviewer (I): Do you have a favour it e object around the house?

Julie (J): Yes, my big blue vase.

I: Oh, out the front?

J: Yes.

I: Because of . . .?

J: Its a one off, theres nothing like it.

I: And the colour?

J: Well, hes just an amazing guy, what he does is he gets the glass and blowsthat onto it and then he actually moulds it, and then it goes back into the

kiln cause its actually . . . that was actually cut off a pipe so that is veryspecial to me cause there is no other one like that. I love that piece, its veryunusual . . . we were very fortunate . . . um, my husband works in adver-tising so we do mix with I suppose what youd call arty type people andwhen we were in New Zealand we got to know whos a very famous artist. . . hes actually one of the top glass blowers . . . there are only four or fiveguys around the world that blow glass and it takes three guys to hold thedamn thing . . .

For Julie, the big blue vase is a status object that gains value pri-

marily through its uniqueness. Despite being led by the interviewer atone juncture, Julie does not talk about aspects of the vases style or aes-thetic features. Instead, she gives prominence to the uniqueness of theobject: it is not available to others and therefore is more valuable to her.


129



17/23

Accompanying this, Julie does accord some importance to time and placefactors that are found in the object, though even this is framed throughthe status enhancement of becoming friends with the artist.

DISCUSSION

The study of objects, things or goods has the potential to become ahighly abstracted form of theorizing. Like concepts such as space orbody, to write about objects lends the author an abstracted tone oftheoretical eminence, as if the topic at hand represents a philosophicalproblem of supreme substance. This is not to say that objects should notbe theorized, or that they are not important in a social context. Clearly,objects occupy a similar position to space, time and bodies; they are

foundational media through which social life is experienced.Part of the problem with accounting for objects is the difficulty

gathering field data that give the user of the object a narrative position.The routinely undervalued voice of the consumer within consumptionstudies literature illustrates the prominence given to theorizing at theexpense of accounting for empirical complexities. However, in thatoeuvre there are now a growing number of useful accounts which privi-lege the consumers standpoint, including more recently: Steven Mileson youth consumption cultures and retro-sneakers (1996), Daniel Miller

on the practice of grocery shopping as a form of provisioning (1998), andAlison Clarke (1998) on modes of commodity acquisition through cata-logue shopping. Likewise, in the area of aesthetics and the self, inter-pretive and qualitative perspectives are more prominent. David Halles(1993) study of art in North American homes is distinguished by itswillingness to give householders the position of curator of their domes-tic space. Michele Lamonts (1992) account of the operation of ethicaland moral boundaries, personal repertoires and style, and generalapproaches to life and work in upper-middle-class France and North

America is exemplary in its deployment of qualitative techniques tocapture the essence of codes of practice which direct modes of opera-tion in the social and aesthetic world. In the Australian context, Bennett,Emmison and Frows (1999) critique and elaboration of the work ofBourdieu (1984) incorporates interview data as a central component oftheir study of national taste cultures.

However, in relation to a sociology of consumption sensitive to thetheoretical concerns of recent versions of material culture studies,empirical accounts are thin on the ground; in fact, disproportionately so

with respect to the healthy number of theoretical treatments. As I havesuggested, one reason for this imbalance relates to the intellectual attrac-tiveness of theorizing objects, much like space and the body; thoughit also relates to the methodological and practical difficulties involved in


130



18/23

doing this type of research. Riggins (1994) autobiographical account ofhis family home is quite pessimistic on this matter. While his categoriesof domestic objects are useful and original, by their exhaustive nature

they end up being restrictive and practically inflexible. Additionally, toreach the theoretical standards set by Riggins would seem to requiregranting the researcher near unregulated access to the domestic setting this may be the reason why Riggins model is apparently based sub-stantially on his family home.

While this paper is based on case studies all women who are rela-tively privileged despite their diverse educational and social backgrounds it provides useful empirical data to account for objects on a range offronts. Significantly, it sheds light on the link between aesthetic and moraljudgements as they are manifested as boundary markers. As Bennett,

Emmison and Frow (1999: 8) point out, Howard Becker (1974) made thislink between aesthetic and moral outlook explicit some time ago in hisanalysis of art cultures. However, in Bourdieus (1984) influential modelof taste and aesthetic judgement, morality and ethics play an insignificantpart in strategies of distinction. Lamont (1992) has exposed this deficiencymost adroitly by demonstrating that moral outlook is an importantresource for social differentiation and integration. Adapting this argu-ment, I would continue by pointing out that what makes aesthetic judge-ment so powerful as a source of social differentiation is that it is partly

based on the ethical and moral values of the claimant. In the cases dis-cussed here, all apart from Julie and her big blue vase give prominenceto self-conduct and the ethical-aesthetic self in their discussion of objects:Anna is concerned with the politics of the object and the family relationsit sits within; Helens chair is an exemplar object which sums up her aes-thetic outlook and lets her situate her own taste within a known style;Christina rejects conventional suburban good taste and champions theauthentic self through her wartishog. These objects are not evaluated aspurely aesthetic things, but have been incorporated into the respondents

value system and act as resources for thinking through broader social andcultural distinctions (Douglas and Isherwood, 1996[1979], Douglas, 1996).It is for this reason that they can be regarded as epiphany objects. UsingLamonts (1992) terminology, these epiphany objects are material bound-ary markers, which suggest things people wish to cultivate about theiraesthetic and moral selves, and exclude polluting aesthetics. I t is thisfiltering role that sees them acquire the status of moral objects. A differ-ent object; an alien colour, shape or texture would not substitute. DanielMillers (1987) point about the creative work of consumption occurring

after purchase rings true in the cases discussed here: through the courseof their trajectory as material components of human existence, householdobjects offer continuous opportunities for managing the boundaries ofself and non-self in a process which fuses aesthetics with ethics.


131



19/23

Additionally, the gender implications of such aesthetic-ethical nar-ratives require further consideration in studies of consumption and taste.While I have not reported data from male participants in this study,

research is required to clarify the gendered nature of taste and aestheticjudgements; specifically, what narratives, rationales and accounts domen give for their aesthetic decisions? The cultural assignment of con-sumption as a feminine activity has been well documented in feministliterature, and acknowledged in consumption studies literature (seeCampbell, 1997). Simmels (1957[1904]: 5501) theory was that womenwere more susceptible to engagement with fashion and a popular aes-thetic as a requirement of their social position that striving for indi-vidualization through competence in taste and aesthetics is a means forwomen to achieve a sense of conspicuousness in the public sphere. Com-

menting on the relation of gender to aesthetic judgement Bourdieu hasreported, seeming to suggest that the traditional gendered division oflabour has encouraged women to employ aesthetic distinctions less fre-quently and systematically than men, that men are, ex officio, on theside of culture whereas women (like the working class) are cast on theside of nature (1984: 40). The following evidence, which suggests theaesthetic expertise of women, may well contradict this assertion. How-ever, it should be noted that the home is a special case in the realm ofpractical aesthetics, which, it could be argued, men are likely to reject

in favour of deliberation on other matters. Madigan and Munro (1996)have found that women tend to bear chief responsibility for decorativechoices in the home. In a study of Australian taste cultures, Bennett,Emmison and Frow (1999) report that while most of the women theyinterviewed were able to talk animatedly about their homes, this wastrue for few men. In their interviews with men about the house, maleinterviewees were found to be taciturn, distancing themselves fromquestions of aesthetics, and oriented toward practical concerns. Camp-bell (1997: 176) reports evidence that in shopping environments male

interviewees have difficulty making judgements of taste and that somemen avoid aesthetic decisions altogether. Since the cases reported hereare exclusively female, it would be expected that male intervieweeswould rely on a different set of narrative resources and strategies toprovide a legitimate account of their tastes.

The research reported in this paper is not without methodologicaldilemmas: management of the domestic setting prior to the interview,and respondents saying what they perceive the researcher wants to hearare issues that need to be considered. However, there are two strong

counter-points that circumscribe the weight of these issues. The first isthat this impression management constitutes a significant source of data,particularly for the topic dealt with in this article (see also Lamont, 1992:21). The aspirations people have for their home, and their ideal ways of


132



20/23

presenting and talking about their home and the objects inside it, arejust as important as how they might actually live in their home. Thesecond point relates to the astute use of other verifiable forms of data

available to the researcher in the domestic setting: is the intervieweegenerally consistent in their aesthetic and moral relations with thehome? Is what the interviewee says about an object realistic given othercues in the home? This need to fit object-relations into a larger pictureof household and interpersonal relations may explain why the case-studyapproach is often used as an aid to the development of theory in socio-cultural accounts of consumption and lifestyle (Bennett, Emmison andFrow, 1999; Bourdieu, 1984; Lamont, 1992; Riggins, 1994).

Perhaps more critically in terms of developing procedures forproposing an interpretive account of taste and material culture,

researchers should bear in mind how such an interpretive account dealswith methodological issues of truth and fiction, reality and represen-tation. Thus, should the interview data presented in this article be seenas the literal, authentic truth of peoples aesthetic preferences? To whatdegree have the normative process of interviewing and the presence ofa researcher in their private, domestic space influenced peoplesresponses? Even more fundamentally and problematically as Denzinasks (1997), to what extent can researchers assume that subjects haveunproblematic access to their own lived experience? In the study of

domestic material culture through face-to-face interviews, we mighteven expect such potential problems to be heightened. Justifying aes-thetic choice using an aesthetic rationale is difficult for lay people toaccomplish.

The answer to each of the questions may well highlight a multitudeof epistemological quandaries; however, this is not necessarily aproblem, but a strength that can be turned to the theorists advantage.In fact, it illuminates a crucial theoretical position about taste, aestheticsand domestic material culture which is assisted by the insights of reflex-

ive ethnography and theories of social accountability. What these inter-views demonstrate is how having taste is an ongoing narrativeaccomplishment, as much as it is an objective, fixed form of social andcultural capital. In identifying and narrativizing their tastes for theresearcher through the use of epiphany objects, the respondents accountfor themselves, their home, and implicitly a universe of others throughthe construction of a taste narrative. The epiphany objects raised in theresearch interviews thus perform an important role for the respondent:they allow abstract ideas about style, taste and aesthetic preference to

be concretized, affording respondents opportunity to elaborate theirnarrative using the epiphany object as an anchor. In turn, the strategyof focusing on a key household object is also profitable for the researcher,as the epiphany object often signifies a persons aesthetic ideal, thus


133



21/23

reducing the complexity of the setting for the researcher and allowinggreater clarity in interpretation of the object-saturated domestic environ-ment.

These methodological issues can be seen more broadly to revolvearound the epistemological dilemma of whether, to use Shotters (1984:4) distinction, these data have been found or made (see also Holsteinand Gubriums discussion of active interviewing, 1997). To recognize theyare made acknowledges they are texts which are actively constructedwithin the research interview, and embedded in a wider discourse abouttaste, the home and the family, which serve to make accountable every-day aspects of peoples reality. I f this is accepted, then issues of respon-dent truth-telling can to a large degree be pushed to the background, andthe ability of narratives of taste to bridge the real and ideal in peoples

lives becomes the key issue for investigation. The implications forresearch into the sociology of taste and practical aesthetics is that ethno-graphic studies, conversation analysis and narrative analysis can yieldprofitable insights. Taste and forms of aesthetic expertise are reflexiveaccomplishments, based in talk and narrative construction, and are pre-sented to visitors, guests and researchers alike, as they are required. Eventhe most emptied-out, banal objects of modern domestic material culturehave a role to play. As a consequence, having taste and making a legiti-mate aesthetic choice is inextricably linked to creating an accountable and

convincing narrative, both for the immediate requirement of theresearcher and for the narrativization of the psycho-social self; as Denzin(1989a: 82) points out we create the persons we write about, just asthey create themselves when they engage in storytelling practice.

Acknowledgement

I would like to thank my colleagues in Sociology at The University of Queens-land Philip Smith, M ichael Emmison, Brad West, Andrew Peake; and also theanonymous referees from Journal of M ateri al Cultur efor their advice and criti-cism, which has helped in the final preparation of this paper.

References

Altman, Irwin, and Gauvain, Mary (1981) A Cross-Cultural and DialecticAnalysis of Homes, in Lynn S. Liben, Arthur H. Patterson and NoraNewcombe (eds) Spati al Representati on and Behaviour Across the Life Span,pp. 283320. New York: Academic Press.

Appadurai, Arjun (1986) Introduction: Commodities and the Politics of Value,in Arjun Appadurai (ed.) The Social Li fe of Things: Commodit ies in CulturalPerspective, pp. 363. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.

Bachelard, Gaston (1994[1958]) The Poetics of Space, Trans. Maria Jolas. Boston,MA: Beacon Press.

Barthes, Roland (1993[1957]) M ythologies, Trans. Annette Lavers. London:Vintage.


134



22/23

Barthes, Roland (1967) The Fashion System, Trans. M. Ward and R. Howard. NewYork: Hill and Wang.

Baudrillard, Jean (1996[1968]) The System of Objects, Trans. J. Benedict. London:Verso.

Baudrillard, Jean (1981) For a Cr it ique of the Poli ti cal Economy of the Sign, Trans.C. Levin. USA: Telos Press.

Becker, Howard (1974) Art as Collective Action, American Sociological Review,39(6): 76776.

Belk, Russell W. (1988) Possessions and the Extended Self, Journal of ConsumerResearch, 15 (September): 13965.

Bennett, Tony, Emmison, M ichael, and Frow, John (1999) Accounti ng for Tastes.Austral ian Everyday Cultur es. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bonnes, Mirilia, Giuliana, Maria Vittoria, Amoni, Flora, and Bernard, Yvonne(1987) Cross-Cultural Rules for the Optimization of the Living Room,Envir onment and Behaviour19(2): 20427.

Bourdieu, Pierre (1984) D istinction. A Social Crit ique of the Judgement of Taste.London: Routledge.Campbell, Colin (1997) Shopping, Pleasure and the Sex War, in Pasi Falk and

Colin Campbell (eds) The Shopping Experience, pp. 16676. London: Sage.Clarke, Alison (1998) Window Shopping at Home: Classifieds, Catalogues and

New Consumer Skills, in Daniel Miller (ed.) Materi al Cul tures. Why SomeThings M atter, pp. 7399. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Csikszentmihalyi, M ihaly, and Rochberg-Halton, Eugene (1981) The M eaning ofThings. D omesti c Symbols and the Self. New York: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Denzin, Norman (1989a) I nterpretive Biography. London: Sage.

Denzin, Norman (1989b) I nterpretive Interactionism. London: Sage.Denzin, Norman (1997) I nterpreti ve Ethnography: Ethnographic Practi ces for the21st Centur y. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dittmar, Helga (1992) The Social Psychology of M aterial Possessions: To H ave is toBe. New York: St Martins Press.

Douglas, Mary (1996) Thought Styles. Cr iti cal Essays on Good Taste. London: Sage.Douglas, Mary, and Isherwood, Baron (1996[1979]) The Wor ld of Goods. Towar ds

an Anthr opology of Consumpt ion. New York: Basic Books.Emmison, M ichael, and Smith, Philip (2000) Researching the Visual. Images,

Objects, Contexts and Interactions in Social and Cultural Inquir y. London: Sage.Featherstone, Mike (1991)Consumer Cul tur e and Postmodernism. London: Sage.

Giddens, Anthony (1991) Moderni ty and Self-Identi ty. Self and Society in the LateM odern Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.Goffman, Erving (1951) Symbols of Class Status, Br it ish Journal of Sociology2(4):

294304.Gottdiener, Mark (1995) Postmodern Semiotics: M aterial Cultur e and the Forms of

Postmodern Life. Oxford: Cambridge.Halle, David (1993) I nside Cult ure. A rt and Class in the American Home. Chicago,

IL: University of Chicago Press.Holstein, James A. and Gubrium, Jaber F. (1997) Active Interviewing, in David

Silverman (ed.)Quali tat ive Research. Theory, Method and Practice, pp.11329.London: Sage.

Kellner, Douglas (1989) Jean Baudri ll ard: From M arxi sm to Post-M odernism andBeyond. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Lamont, M ichle (1992) M oney, M orals and M anners. The Cultur e of the Frenchand Ameri can Upper-M iddle Class. Chicago, IL: The University of ChicagoPress.

Lash, Scott, and Urry, John (1994)Economies of Signs and Space. London: Sage.


135



23/23

Laumann, Edward O. and House, James S. (1970) Living Room Styles and SocialAttributes: The Patterning of Material Artifacts in a Modern UrbanCommunity, in Edward O. Laumann, Paul M . Siegel and Robert W. Hodge(eds) The Logic of Social H ierar chies, pp. 189203. Chicago, IL: Markham

Publishing Company.Lawrence, Roderick J. (1985) A More Humane History of Homes: Research

Method and Application, in Irwin Altman and Carol M . Werner (eds)HomeEnvironments, pp. 11332. New York: Plenum Press.

Lawrence, Roderick J . (1987) What Makes a Home a House?, Environment andBehaviour19(2): 15468.

McCracken, Grant (1988) Culture and Consumption: New Approaches to theSymbolic Character of Consumer Goods and Act ivi ti es. Bloomington: IndianaUniversity Press.

Madigan, Ruth, and Munro, Moira (1996) House Beautiful: Style and Consump-tion in the Home, Sociology30(1): 4157.

Mauss, Marcel (1954) The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in ArchaicSocieties, Trans. I. Cunnison. London: Cohen and West.

Miles, Steven (1996) The Cultural Capital of Consumption: Understanding Post-modern Identities in a Cultural Context, Cul tur e and Psychology2: 13958.

Miller, Daniel (1987)Materi al Cul ture and Mass Consumption. Oxford: Blackwell.Miller, Daniel (1995) Consumption as the Vanguard of History, in Daniel Miller

(ed.) Acknowledging Consumpt ion: A Review of New Studies, pp. 157. London:Routledge.

Miller, Daniel (1998) A Theory of Shopping. Cambridge: Polity Press.Rapoport, Amos (1969) House Form and Cul ture. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice

Hall.

Riessman, Catherine Kohler (1993)Narrative Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Riggins, Stephen Harold (1994) Fieldwork in the Living Room: An Autoethno-graphic Essay, in Stephen Harold Riggins (ed.) The Socialness of Things. Essayson the Socio-Semiotics of Objects, pp. 10147. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Schultz, Susan E., Kleine, Robert E. I II and Kernan, Jerome B. (1989) These area Few of My Favourite Things. Toward an Explication of Attachment as aConsumer Behavior Construct, Advances in Consumer Research16: 35966.

Shotter, John (1984)Social Accountabi l it y and Selfhood. New York: Basil Blackwell.Simmel, Georg (1957[1904]) Fashion, The American Journal of SociologyLXII(6):

54158.Veblen, Thorstein (1899) The Theory of the Leisure Class: an Economic Study of

Institutions. New York: Modern Library.Vera, Hernan (1989) On Dutch Windows, Qual it ati ve Sociology 12(2): 21534.

I A N WO OD WA R D is a lecturer in sociology in the School of Social Scienceat the University of Queensland. His current research is in the field of con-sumption, taste and aesthetic judgement. His other interests include theories ofpostmodernization, and urban space and symbolism. Most recently, he has pub-lished on consumerism and disorientation in postmodern spaces (The Brit ishJournal of Sociology, with Michael Emmison and Philip Smith), on everyday dis-courses of good and bad taste (Poetics, with Michael Emmison), and in Architec-tur al Theory Review, on historical changes in the discourses of shopping mallarchitects. Address: Department of Sociology, Anthropology and Archaeology,

The University of Queensland, Brisbane Q 4072, Australia.[email: [email protected]]


Journal of Material Culture-2001-Woodward-115-36.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Journal of Material Culture-2001-Woodward-115-36.pdf