Decoding a 'simple life', Part Two: Times change
Blogland ably serves two ends of the consumption continuum: bulking up and simplicity (often aligned with frugality). For every earnest home-canner, there's a babe on shopping steroids swinging a Birkin. Like political parties, both sides cite identical, unimpeachable values (self-expression, creativity, autonomy) and have opposing tactics for their expression.
There's room for the middle way, too, because ultimately you need a new coat or computer, and that's the Passage's beat: the intersection of value, aesthetics and ethics, or at least a purchase you can live with.
When I want inspiration, I head not to the loot blogs, but to the examples of simple-living, and one of the best is right within my extended family.
The gypsy caravan
A recently-married couple, Nika and Mike, are members of my son's partner's family. They have built their own gypsy caravan, which is their home. You can read about the design and construction process at their inspiring blog, Mikeandnikamakeahome.
They have not sacrificed beauty for simple-living; every detail pleases the eye. They've been helped by many friends, a heartening version of the old barn-raising.
They write, in their post "Why We Do What We Do" (June 4, 2013):
"We are eliminating as many “things” from our lives as we can (especially the ones that cost money) to lower our cost of living. If I decide that I would like something, I weigh how much I desire that thing with how it will change my life (how much money will it cost and will I have to earn more money?, where to store it?, will it need to be maintained through its life and what does that involve?, etc.). I find this in contrast to the way I observe most of American culture as wanting the biggest house/bank account/steak or the most vacation homes/cars/trophies."
When I was their age, I was interested in those trophies; a "he who dies with the most toys wins" ethos prevailed. I knew dedicated homesteaders and commune-dwellers, but somewhere along the way the Whole Earth Catalogue got replaced by Crate & Barrel's.
I didn't inherit my material desires from my Depression-era parents; in fact, I wondered why they didn't buy more. They invariably repied, "Why? We don't need it." The elevation of bulky-living was amplified by decades of middle-class wage gains and a distortion of American ambition and enthusiasm.
Years passed before I began to question, then curb, bulk. Many young adults are not like I was; like Mike and Nika, they are consciously creating lives of self-sufficiency and low consumption.
My
generation are now reappraising, asking, as Marina did, what is enough. The reckoning must have started before the last recession, but 2009 ruptured reflexive buying habits, especially in the over-50 cohort, who have never regained their level of employment or income.
Simple-living is far more than tiring of stacks of crammed boxes or realizing you don't need an expensive bag.
Nika and Mike on the larger implications of choice:
"There is a serious addiction to consumption and we have two choices:
1. Continue on our path of consumption, CO2 and radioactive waste generation, and genetic biodiversity destruction (plant and animal) which will make life on this planet much more challenging, if possible at all, for our children and grandchildren, or
2. Learn to live in a way that is not destructive to the life-cycles of our planet.
This second option requires a good deal of trail-blazing or remembering how our ancestors once lived. It is an interesting time to be alive to say the least.
I do not believe that most people within consumptive culture are doing anything wrong, but don’t realize what is happening or are in too deep to know how to get out of the rat race. They are probably so busy and tired while trying to earn enough money to pay the bills. It is actually a luxury to be able to slow down, take it all in and figure out an alternative."
Le Duc and I are unlikely to build a caravan, but we can learn much from this resourceful couple and other young adults. And they from us, perhaps, as they watch us shed a glut of goods. Friends and acquaintances have grown more discerning, socially-conscious and debt-averse.
I'm eager to hear about your experiments in simple-living, and those of your children or friends.
There's room for the middle way, too, because ultimately you need a new coat or computer, and that's the Passage's beat: the intersection of value, aesthetics and ethics, or at least a purchase you can live with.
When I want inspiration, I head not to the loot blogs, but to the examples of simple-living, and one of the best is right within my extended family.
The gypsy caravan
 |
| Mike and Nika about to roll out on the maiden voyage |
A recently-married couple, Nika and Mike, are members of my son's partner's family. They have built their own gypsy caravan, which is their home. You can read about the design and construction process at their inspiring blog, Mikeandnikamakeahome.
They have not sacrificed beauty for simple-living; every detail pleases the eye. They've been helped by many friends, a heartening version of the old barn-raising.
They write, in their post "Why We Do What We Do" (June 4, 2013):
"We are eliminating as many “things” from our lives as we can (especially the ones that cost money) to lower our cost of living. If I decide that I would like something, I weigh how much I desire that thing with how it will change my life (how much money will it cost and will I have to earn more money?, where to store it?, will it need to be maintained through its life and what does that involve?, etc.). I find this in contrast to the way I observe most of American culture as wanting the biggest house/bank account/steak or the most vacation homes/cars/trophies."
When I was their age, I was interested in those trophies; a "he who dies with the most toys wins" ethos prevailed. I knew dedicated homesteaders and commune-dwellers, but somewhere along the way the Whole Earth Catalogue got replaced by Crate & Barrel's.
I didn't inherit my material desires from my Depression-era parents; in fact, I wondered why they didn't buy more. They invariably repied, "Why? We don't need it." The elevation of bulky-living was amplified by decades of middle-class wage gains and a distortion of American ambition and enthusiasm.
Years passed before I began to question, then curb, bulk. Many young adults are not like I was; like Mike and Nika, they are consciously creating lives of self-sufficiency and low consumption.
My
generation are now reappraising, asking, as Marina did, what is enough. The reckoning must have started before the last recession, but 2009 ruptured reflexive buying habits, especially in the over-50 cohort, who have never regained their level of employment or income.Simple-living is far more than tiring of stacks of crammed boxes or realizing you don't need an expensive bag.
Nika and Mike on the larger implications of choice:
"There is a serious addiction to consumption and we have two choices:
1. Continue on our path of consumption, CO2 and radioactive waste generation, and genetic biodiversity destruction (plant and animal) which will make life on this planet much more challenging, if possible at all, for our children and grandchildren, or
2. Learn to live in a way that is not destructive to the life-cycles of our planet.
This second option requires a good deal of trail-blazing or remembering how our ancestors once lived. It is an interesting time to be alive to say the least.
I do not believe that most people within consumptive culture are doing anything wrong, but don’t realize what is happening or are in too deep to know how to get out of the rat race. They are probably so busy and tired while trying to earn enough money to pay the bills. It is actually a luxury to be able to slow down, take it all in and figure out an alternative."
Le Duc and I are unlikely to build a caravan, but we can learn much from this resourceful couple and other young adults. And they from us, perhaps, as they watch us shed a glut of goods. Friends and acquaintances have grown more discerning, socially-conscious and debt-averse.
I'm eager to hear about your experiments in simple-living, and those of your children or friends.
Comments
But am I really living simply? It's hard to answer 'yes' when I'm so very tied into our wasteful culture. I may not personally be wasteful but isn't my life made possible/comfortable by wasteful practices in general? How to make that right? Your young couple living closer to that goal....a challenge for me to get closer too.
My husband & I have our own version of 'simple living' but true advocates of that approach may not recognise it as such. We live in the UK where unspoken social snobbery is still rife and people ask us when we will be 'moving up the housing ladder'. We live in a very modest Victorian terraced house with a generous garden, which offers plenty of space for us and 2 boys: 4 bedrooms, a study apiece for hubs and I, sitting room, dining room, kitchen and utility room, a WC and 2 bathrooms. Writing that down, it's luxury!
But people see a disjoint between my husband's profession and presumed income ( I currently a SAHM) and where we live - we could 'afford' a mortgage many multiples of his income which would land us in a million pound detached house. But why. We don't need it or want it, nor the higher energy bills, the extra furniture to fill it, nor the extra maintenance, paying for a cleaner and gardener to keep such a mansion spic and span. We live well below our means, and feel abundantly blessed, with ample time to enjoy family and community activities, growing our own veggies, good neighbours, vibrant city centre 20 mins walk or 10 mins by bicycle. We are living our life and making our own choices, not driven by 'what will others think of us'. but it is so so easy (I've been there) to unconsciously be propelled into making lifestyle choices out of fear of what others will think - is one being too eccentric, too 'mean' (i.e. frugal), too idealistic ('we're all going to hell in a handbasket and the planet is doomed so what's the point of mindfully changing your consumption habits' pessimistic thinking).
My sons have been drilled in the ways of the 'evil marketing man', this faceless person who wants their pocket money for plastic tat that is forgotten within a week, when they have their own personal supercomputer of a brain that can create and invent toys from the back garden for free. I don't wish to sound pious, I am only sharing with them the benefit of my own wince-inducing profligate past habits.
Agnes
Consumption at a certain level does become harmful. That said, I don't find self-denial to be virtuous in and of itself.
In other words, if I had to choose between a generous profligate and a self-righteous abstainer from anything, I'd choose the former. And have.
By which I do not mean to say your extended family is self-righteous. Nor to say it wouldn't be possible to live simply and generously. I do mean to say that we all choose our virtues and our sins - and both lie in wait under Dionysian and the Apollonian.
For all their good intentions people like this are actually "takers", just the cost of educating their children, paying for the road system and health care comes from the people they despise - the consumers, you know the ones who create the jobs. Without them we would be living in a third world country. They can rationalize all they want but their lifestyle does not make them better.
Mme: Timing is important because at a certain time, the work becomes onerous.
Swissy: There's a lot online, which reduces the need to buy books.
LauraH: I think of the culture more as a plant with branching roots than a single driving force. Some consumption is nearly impossible for me to forgo, others much easier.
Agnes: Thank you for your vivid example; it is quite unusual in my circles for people who could have much more to not "go for it". We can do a lot of good for others, too, if we have more income then we need to live.
LPC: I sense you do not enjoy their tone, or maybe their choice, very much. They are young, not yet having to think about some things that come with age and a family. Now is the time for them to try this life; that's my take.
Anon@11:22: They are rejecting certain behaviours; they do not state that they despise anyone. They pay taxes, do not collect welfare, and work. They help their neighbours.
I too know people who led, than left, communal or self-sustaining lives. I also know people with six TVs and four cars. We could both cherry-pick examples. This young couple are doing something to reduce their use of dwindling resources. I don't see that as "taking".
Your friends are by no means alone. Lots of people are talking about this construct, and it's more the talk I mind than anything else, because it tends to the self-righteous.
Manufactured stuff is morally neutral. Yes it uses up resources, but it also employees people.
Re self-righteousness, it's a common human condition to be in love with your position. Is there not also self-righteousness in "Oh look at my fabulous new x.... I deserve it?" Sometimes my perception of self-righteousness is actually my defensivness and guilt over not being very careful myself.
The far end of the self-denial discomfits me too. I am the child of such a mother. Once my brother asked if he could have an apple as an after-school snack. My mother handed him a matchbox in which she had saved apple seeds and told him, "Plant them." No kidding.
Roberta: Can't tell you how happy I am to no longer own a car! $45/month for unlimited transit pass, that's it. And agree re smaller space revealing abundance.
If one defines morality as effecting good for many, as I do. Certain religions of course find more absolute morals in abstention itself.
And, am I defending myself? Of course!
Wendy
Wendy: You had me right up to the part about jewels (kidding). Thanks for the appreciation.
Gretchen: This is an area in which I have a ways to go. My student son showed up in a sweatshirt the other day, about 3-4 times what I thought it should cost. "But", he said, "made locally!" I had to really stop and take a deep breath- yikes, a moment of reckoning.
It's interesting watching my kids. Kid 1 is 16 and he seems to be a pared-down person by nature. He has no desire for 'stuff' whatsoever. He buys a few of items of clothing - the best quality he can afford, never super-cheap - and wears them until they are worn out. He does have a smartphone and a laptop, but actually had the phone forced on him and needs the computer for school. He goes to school with very wealthy kids, but simply doesn't appear to care that our house is tiny, we have only one car, etc. He is frugal (packs his own lunches when he goes skating for the day!) and healthy.
Kid 2 has just turned 13 and seems to be more of a packrat and freer with her money, but I wonder if this will change as she begins earning her own money ... Her friends seem to be much more extravagant and there have been a few comments about how everyone else (at school) has 2 cars and huge houses and swimming pools. I just shrug and say 'not us'.
On a lighter note, my son refuses to get a car and is planning on acquiring some backyard chickens.
That said, the other extreme can be wearying, too. (How does your brother feel about apples, all these years later?)
frugal: I just horrified a new friend when I asked if her rabbits were pets or for meat. (But in my former neighbourhood several people raised them for food.)
Jean S: Well he likes apples fine, and was sweetly generous to his own children when they were growing up, determined to be different.
Oh, as a •bed•- I saw her dog in one of those little coats, but a minkie!
Super-frugal people used to drive me nuts. For example, one couple I knew would share a cup of coffee in a restaurant. Now I am more accepting but still there is a type of frugality that feels either too crabbed or kind of show-offy.
Still, even the those who irritated me have been helpful in me cleaning up my mindless habits.
I do admire their youthful dream of living this way and I hope it brings them much happiness and fulfillment. I love their creativity and willingness to share their experience.
I, too, predict that they will try another lifestyle after a few years of living this way, but will have many takeaway lessons which will inform their future life.
Just because they do not generate a high income does not mean they do not contribute. By consciously seeking to steward scarce resources, recycle and make do with used things, they are making a qualitative contribution to the good of all- not just themselves.
I reiterate, these people are not on welfare.
If we follow that reasoning, persons who have no children would pay no school taxes (and I guess be unconcerned about something like literacy for the entire population), those with no cars would not pay for road repairs, or perhaps a reduced amount. Persons with no interest in the arts would not pay for publicly-subsidized cultural events or institutions, nor would those who don't use a public park pay for the green space. The physically able would not pay for handicapped facilities- it goes on and on.
It depends on to what extent one is willing to build a collective society over one that values individualism.
I used to work for a woman who said her goal was to die with no regrets. I'm not sure if that's possible--regrets are such a part of being human--but I'd sure like to limit the ones related to consumerism....
People who work as aides in homes for the elderly, for example, don't typically make large salaries. Neither do the many service workers our society depends on.
I'd been reading this discussion attentively. But while anything but a "frugality" prude - like good company, food and wine far too much for that - I've always organised my life to have a very small environmental footprint, and know quite a few other people here who have done the same. Including young parents who deliberately don't have a car (yes, easier to do here in Montréal with good public transport, bicycle paths and a carshare system for "big shoppings" and travel to the countryside, but those too are choices).
The most recent IPCC results indicate that the situation is changing even more quickly than predicted...
This is an interesting discussion and I don't want to leave the impression that I am disapproving in any way of this daring and creative young couple. I don't think we have many willing takers in our society by the way. Going further would take me into political territory.
Yes, a dog bed, not a dog coat. Ridiculous, maybe, but not as ridiculous as me wearing a full length mink while walking the dog. Really, what was I thinking?
Shopping and acquisition can be so boring. Makes for poor conversation, but if you give it some thought it is amazing how many hours of thought and conversation goes towards acquiring. I find too many conversations are about what was recently purchased and what the next purchase might be. It's boring! I'd much rather here about what someone has done rather than what they are buying.
Btw, I've made the same error regarding rabbits. I thought they were a source of food!
This notion seemed utterly alien to him.
Dog bed- would want one I could wash but I'd be thinking of mink pillows for my own bed or sofa, or yum, a mink vest to pop on with jeans.
The value of "common weal"- the notion of public good- is hard to discern in that anonymous comment- but present in yours.
One person's overconsumption is another's requisite, which is why such topics unleash defensiveness.
I do think economic activity is important for every aspect of human life.