Back to main

Disposal and Simple Living: Exploring the Circulation of Goods and the Development of Sacred Consumption

1. Disposal and simple living: exploring the circulation of goods and the development of sacred consumption

§1

Hélène Cherrier*

§2

American University in Dubai, School of Business Administration, Department of Marketing, PO Box 28282, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

  • • This study examines how consumers who engage in voluntary simplicity experience disposal in relation to changes in their values, identity, and lifestyle. The hermeneutic analysis shows disposal organized around three main themes: “desire for emancipation,” “sacrificing the surplus,” and “moving toward the sacred.” Each theme offers insights on disposal as a transcendental experience during which consumers relocate consumption meanings from the profane to the sacred. On the one hand, the practice of disposal symbolizes a distance from the profane marketplace and its constraining norms and on the other hand, it leads consumers to participate in the life of objects and to construct sacred consumption. Here, goods are removed from the profane commerce and transferred to sacredness with an eternal life of transit between hands and ownership. As such, goods can be regarded as alive, physically moving from one person to another. This article concludes that voluntary disposal can be seen as a form of empowerment. Through disposal, consumers participate in the life of objects. By contributing to the circulation of the material, consumers have the power to transform an act of pure elimination into a transcendental experience that prefigures the death of profane consumption and the birth of sacred consumption.
§3

Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

1.1. Introduction

§1

Removing, passing on, throwing away, getting rid of, or letting go are concepts increasingly studied in consumer behavior literature and this special issue in the Journal of Consumer Behavior clearly helps position disposal as a

§2

fundamental consumer activity. The practice of disposal spans a wide spectrum, ranging from mundane disposal such as managing daily waste, to radical disposal such as clearing out cluttered space and/or life (Belk et al., 2007; Cherrier and Murray, 2007). The continuum of disposal practices often varies in relation to life events such as birth, growing up, divorce, death, moving house, or migrating (Belk, 1992; McAlexander and Schouten, 1992; McAlexander et al., 1993; Price and Arnould, 2000). Recent studies also show that disposal can be linked to

*Correspondence to: Hélène Cherrier, American University in Dubai, School of Business Administration, Department of Marketing, PO Box 28282, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
E-mail: hcherrier@aud.edu

§3

changing values and forging different lifestyle (Cherrier and Murray, 2007; Gregson, 2007). This study focuses on the practice of disposal in relation to a change in values and contributes to the existing literature by offering insights on how disposal is necessary for consumers to forge a particular consumption lifestyle - in our case: simple living.

§4

In the simple living and downshifting literature, it is often argued that material possessions are relegated to a diminished role (Gandolfi and Cherrier, 2008). For example, Elgin (1981) identifies the main characteristic of voluntary simplicity in terms of prioritizing material simplicity. Similarly, Etzioni states that voluntary simplicity represents a choice to "cultivate nonmaterialistic sources of satisfaction and meaning" (Etzioni, 1998, p. 620) and Jackson (2005) notes that downshifting practitioners are motivated by a desire to live a less materialistic life. In fact, the historian David Shi (1985) describes the simple life as a "less is more" (p. 3) philosophy and defines simple living as an "approach to living that self-consciously subordinates the material to the ideal" (p. 4). Looking closely at the diversity of anecdotal and scholarly accounts on the methods of living a simple life, a fundamental matter is to dispose of material possessions that do not respond to the new ideal (Etzioni, 1998; Schor, 1998; Grigsby, 2004; Cherrier and Murray, 2007). The concern for this study lies in the way disposal is used by downshifting practitioners to construct a "simple" consumption lifestyle.

§5

This research examines the process of material disposal described by individuals who opted for a life of material simplicity. While presenting a comprehensive review of downshifting and voluntary simplicity literature is beyond the scope of this study, the conceptual foundation describes theories of disposal in relation to forging new consumption lifestyles. Exploring disposal related to changes in consumption practices requires considering changes in values and meanings attached to material possessions. In line with existential phenomenological interviewing, the section on study and findings presents

§6

the hermeneutical analysis of ten interviews organized around three main themes: "desire for emancipation," "sacrificing the surplus," and "moving toward the sacred." The themes show disposal as a symbolic instrument for forging sacred consumption lifestyles and suggest the process of disposal as a vehicle of transcendent experience. The study concludes with insights on the concepts of sacrifice and the sacred within practices of disposal and call for further research the transfer of meanings consumers experience when disposing of their material goods.

1.2. Conceptual foundation

§1

The field of consumer behavior is highly involved in understanding the relationship between objects and consumers, not solely in terms of utility or functionality but also in terms of psychological and social resonance. As Belk (1988) points out, objects are not just objects that we physically use during our lives. Objects contribute to our extended self on a social and emotional basis (Belk, 1988; Tian and Belk, 2005). By their presence, objects allow us to express our unique identities (Kleine et al., 1995), group affiliation (Mehta and Belk, 1991), and historical self (Belk, 1988). Similarly, by their absence, objects can symbolize an undesired self (Wood, 1989; Mehta and Belk, 1991; Schouten, 1991; Hogg and Banister, 2001), an avoidance or rejection of some role or conception of self (Lastovicka and Fernandez, 2005), or a detachment from social upbringing (Cherrier and Murray, 2007). When the lack of material possessions is due to lower economic condition, consumers often experience undesired identities (Lewis, 1966).

§2

Because objects, both by their presence and by their absence, are seemingly essential for physically and emotionally positioning our self-schema, understanding the movements of the objects from being present to being absent in one's life is of central interest in consumer behavior. The interest lies in involuntary disposal where the loss of possessions is often experienced as a violation of the self (Belk,

§3

1988; Wallendorf and Arnould, 1988) and voluntary disposal for which letting of our possessions can be understood along diverse but not mutually exclusive perspectives such as disengagement from the past, symbolic immortality, practice of circulation, and consumer resistance. Since the aim of this study is to understand disposal from the perspective of individuals who deliberately simplified their life, the following discussion centers on the concept of voluntary disposal.

§4

Young and Wallendorf (1989, p. 33) conceptualize disposal as "the process of detachment from self." As objects are used to define and orient who we are, giving up something that belongs to me entails a separation from part of the self. The notion of detachment from self provides the basis for examining disposal as a complex process including, on the one hand, the physical detachment from the object and on the other hand, the emotional detachment from the meanings attached to the object (McCracken, 1986; Young and Wallendorf, 1989). McCracken (1986) conceptualizes consumers' emotional detachment as divestment rituals; a process during which individuals empty goods of the meanings associated with the previous owner and/or invested in the object. On these grounds, Lastovicka and Fernandez (2005) note that divestment rituals are necessary for positively charged possessions but are unnecessary for negatively charged possessions. With reference to consumers' struggle to let go of positively charged possessions, Belk argues that individuals refuse to dispose of their most cherished possessions that reflect a positive attachment to the past (Belk et al., 1989). For Belk, the "never sell" possessions are sacred and are rarely disposed of. If ever disposed of, the positively charged special possessions undergo a process of cleansing during which the private meanings are detached from the object (Lastovicka and Fernandez, 2005). Similarly, in support to consumers' willingness to depart from objects charged with negative emotional meanings, McAleanders et al. (1991) show disposal in terms of a desired departure, a practice to break free from an unwanted past and identity

§5

and Cherrier and Murray (2007) note disposal as a way to distance oneself from constraining social shaping dictated by religious, parental or sub-cultural influences.

§6

In addition to moving away from the past, processes of disposal are also performed with aims equivalent to achieving symbolic immortality. Under this perspective, the movement of objects from the private to the public sphere acts as a cultural blueprint and reinforces social relations (Wallendorf and Arnould, 1988; Price and Arnould, 2000; Curasi et al., 2004). For example, Lastovicka and Fernandez (2005) emphasize that disposal integrates the manipulation of meanings associated with the objects through iconic transfer. The manipulation of meanings and the development of congruity between the giver and the receiver tie the process of disposal to the development of a "we-self" or shared selves. Here, disposal is approached in terms of influencing the lives of others and the meanings attached to the objects. In a similar perspective, Price and Arnould's (2000) study of older consumers shows disposal in terms of strengthening intergenerational ties. For their informants, disposal is a form of therapy to ensure that positively charged possessions are passed on to good and caring homes. Older consumers dispose of their special possessions so as to express, objectify, strengthen and immortalize their lives, meanings, and relationships.

§7

Thirdly, disposal can be viewed as a necessary step for consumers to re-order their lives and forge new consumption lifestyles based on desired selves or new life directions. In their research on downshifting, Cherrier and Murray (2007) stress that disposal is strongly linked to the construction of new identities and new lifestyles. They highlight a four-stage process of identity construction: sensitization, separation, socialization, and striving. The striving stage represents a post-disposal struggle to construct new identities and develop social affiliations. Similarly, Gregson (2007) shows disposal as a practice of ordering our lifestyles. In her research, disposal is connected to everyday practices and most particularly to the reproduction of consumption lifestyles. She notes

§8

that getting rid of the surplus of objects is crucial to evolve through life and circulate along new consumption lifestyles.

§9

Finally, disposal can be understood as a form of consumer resistance to the ideology of accumulation, holding on to and storing goods (Berkin et al., 2006; Gregson, 2007). This perspective outlines the postmodern critique of consumer culture as a baving mode of existence; an existence that prioritizes ownership and material accumulation (Fromm, 1979; Shankar and Fitchett, 2002; Cherrier and Murray, 2007). Belk et al. discussion on the increasing difficulties people encounter in finding ways to de-clutter their space is a grounded example of a society governed by material accumulation and lack of disposal practices (Belk et al. 2007). The notion of disposal as a way to distance oneself from the logic of the market is explicit in Kozinets' (2002) study on the Burning Man. For Kozinets (2002), to give up or to burn material possessions can be understood as "a transformational shrinking of this (over)extended material self-one" (p. 36). During the Burning Man event, participants remove objects from the commodity exchange and place them into the realm of the sacred using various disposal practices such as gift-giving and sacrifice. The practice of gift-giving helps develop social bonds, care, sharing and communities and the practice of sacrifice nourishes a purpose of self-transformation toward communal and anti-materialist ideals.

§10

Given the social and dynamic nature of disposal, studying the personal experience of individuals who deliberately let go of their possessions in the process of living the simple life may provide insights on disposal as a means for self-transformation, lifestyle changes and perhaps consumer empowerment in face of mainstream consumer behavior and ideologies of endless material accumulation.

1.3. The study

§1

The study consists of existential phenomenological interviewing with ten informants who

§2

identify themselves as voluntary simplifiers. As self-proclaimed voluntary simplifiers, they made a voluntary choice to simplify their lives and live a simpler, healthier, and more balanced lifestyle (Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton, 1981).

§3

The recruitment process started with three weeks of advertising placed in two local newspapers. Of the 24 individuals who responded to the advertisement and were living a simple lifestyle, 17 reported a process of material disposal. A brief phone interview with the informants enabled the selection of 10 individuals who, at one point in their life, voluntarily lowered their amount of material possessions. During the telephone interviews, each informant had to explain whether their consumption lifestyles had drastically changed and if so, how. The phone interview aimed to classify informants in terms of their downshifting and simple living experience with reference to Etzioni's (1998) classification. None of the questions related to disposal and if any references to disposal occurred, it emerged from the informants' narratives. The 10 selected informants mentioned the relevance of disposal in their downshifting experience. In addition, the selection process followed four rationales. First, the informants had to articulate insights on a process of disposal in terms of before and after a change in the amount of possessions they own. Second, all participants voluntarily decided to dispose of their possessions. Third, each selected informant did not have previous theoretical understanding of disposal practices. Finally, the informants were all willing to share their personal experience with a researcher during a face-to-face interview. The informants were then assured of confidentiality and anonymity.

§4

The method of existential phenomenological interviewing enabled to capture the stories of individuals who voluntarily decided to dispose of their possessions in order to simplify their lives. The aim of the interviews was to acquire descriptive details on the process of disposal from the informant's perspective (Thompson, 1997). The interest was on the

§5

informants' disposal experience and not in reason, rationality, and objectivity. As a process, the narratives reflect the before, during and after state of disposal. The hermeneutic analysis focused on the process of disposal using relevant literature on disposal, simple living as well as consumer resistance, gift-giving and sacrifice. The hermeneutic analysis reveals three main themes: "desire for emancipation," "sacrificing the surplus," and "moving toward the sacred."

1.3.1. Desire for emancipation

§1

Numerous consumer behavior studies note that objects are not merely tangible and visible items responding to utilitarian needs; they are a more fundamentally visual and tactile reflection of our interaction with others, our life trajectory, and our expectations of the future (Belk, 1988). Objects help situate our identity in terms of self, others, and temporal experiences. In the same way that objects helps express our identities, objects can violate our sense of self. This is an important point; the objects we own do not always reflect a wanted or desired identity. The analysis of the 10 downshifting stories clearly suggests that material possessions can confuse or contradict our sense of self and build up to a "not me" identity. The informants' unwanted identity was linked to owning, accumulating and "collecting" (Alison) material objects that, kept throughout the years, became a "burden" (Lisa) or a "weight" (Angie). For the informant, the accumulated objects created a cluttered and over-materialized lifestyle leaving them to a state of "inertia" (Alison) and "unhappiness" (Maria). For example, Lisa mentioned that her house had become similar to the "Adams Family house, full of stuff and things, costumes and props from shows" (Lisa). She describes this period of her life "surrounded by objects" (Lisa) as follow:

§2

Around that stage, and all through that time from between there and when I got rid of pretty much everything, it was like a

§3

burden. I would feel bad, heavy, you know, like carrying a burden, yes, and I wanted to, yes, I had to get rid of the stuff. (Lisa)

§4

Lisa, along with the other informants, expressed the need to dispose of objects that were violating their sense of self. The objects, their material forms, and cultural meanings were in violation to each informant's sense of "true" (Angie) self, "real" (Alison) self, "authentic" (Dave) self or "someone who does not need a lot of things" (Maria). Angie, a 28-year-old woman relates to her pre-disposal experience as a life that did not reflect her identity. In the following excerpt, Angie describes her desire to change something in her life. Her desire emanates from rejecting the "consumption machine everyone else is part of" and from a longing to become her "true" self.

§5

I think you need to have an experience of yourself as something that you're not, or that isn't aligned with your truth in order to choose something else. [... ]I guess I was, you know, part of that consumption machine everyone else is part of. Until you, you make a change in your life so you can become your true self. (Angie)

§6

Informants expressed a desire for a change in their lives following a particular event. The triggering event was different for each informant. For Angie, it was the experience of meeting individuals who suffered from cancer; for Andrew, it was a divorce; for Dave and Scott, the learning of Buddhist values; for Alison, a critic from her acquaintance; for Simon, seeing how people live in India; and for Maria, it was simply looking at an old picture that reminded her of who she really is.

§7

I found an old photo of myself in my room when I was a child, when I had very little possessions, very little things and I was just sitting there and I could remember when that photo was taken how happy I was on that day. I was climbing a tree just before the photo was taken and I had my

§8

dogs and I look at that photo and remember, 'That's who I am. Someone who doesn't need lots of things'. I don't know what had triggered to get to that point where I needed the moment of clarity... obviously lots of experience had come before then. (Maria)

§9

With an awareness of not acting and not being the person she used to be, Maria struggled with a desire for change. She illustrates her desire for transformation when she states feelings "obliged to wear nice things and have nice furniture," which gave her "low confidence" and made her feel "bad" about herself (Maria). Maria's "moment of clarity" reflects her desire break away from having to respond to social norms and being compelled to act and live an existence untrue to her self. Similarly, Andrew's narrative is filled with reference to societal and religious demands. In the following excerpt, Andrew describes the pressure to act according to religious norms and obligations.

§10

What I think is the biggest part of it, of downsizing, is getting rid of your conditioning... Well, I was seeing all the pomp. Seeing the grandeur of the ceremonies of the church and seeing so much poverty in the world and being aware that the church has occupied the highest point and their lavish and there's always gold and stained glass and everywhere there seems to be so much wealth in the church and ab, you know. All around there's poverty and they just seem to be insulating. I question that and I said, "I don't want to do this anymore." (Andrew)

§11

Andrew's desire to emancipate himself from religious obligations allied with the act of disposal. Getting rid of most of his belongings materialized an existential distance from an unwanted normative background. While several informants reflected on the societal pressure to follow religious norms and obligations, most informants mentioned concepts similar to postmodern critical theory on

§12

consumer culture (Firat and Venkatesh, 1995; Baudrillard, 1998) such as: "consumption machine," "consumerism," "shopping centers," "stores," "waste" (Angie), "fill up the earth with trash" and "land fills" (Michelle), "brainwashing branding" (Alison), the "superficial," "stuff" and "newness" (Andrew), our "culture" (Simon), "take refuge in the material" "fear of intimacy" (Scott), "advertising" (Maria, Lisa, and Alison), "mainstream" (Maria), "materialism" (Dave) and the "city culture" (Alison). Central to each concept is the existence of normative forces suppressing informants' self-expression and desired identity. In the following excerpt, Maria describes the market's impact on her identities and her desire to emancipate herself from constraining "mainstream" norms and obligations.

§13

I needed to have a mental place to put my head up and take stock of the different opportunities, because I wasn't going to just follow a mainstream path any more. I had to free my space, my mental, emotional and physical space. (Maria)

§14

The constraining impact of consumer culture and religious norms on informants' identity triggered in Maria the desire to free her space, gave Lisa the "desire to just free [herself] from anything that was holding [her] down" (Lisa) or lead Angie to "make a change, escape this consumerism" (Angie). Because informants' desire to emancipate themselves from constraining forces responds to a quest to feel alive and be "true" selves, a sacrifice was essential to pursue such an outcome (Belk et al., 2003). Informants "had to get rid of the stuff" (Lisa). They had to sacrifice the "city clothes" (Alison), the "material" (Dave), "lots of things" (Andrew), "all my belongings" (Simon), the "stuff" (Angie) and even "beautiful Egyptian ornaments" (Lisa) and "beautiful things" (Elisa) in order to fulfill their desire. Such finding support Belk et al.'s (2003) notion that consumer desire involves sacrifice and leads to discuss the second theme: sacrificing the surplus.

1.3.2. Sacrificing the surplus

§1

Sacrifice is a difficult and perhaps controversial topic in consumer behavior. Under the capitalist circuit of exchange, with its emphasis on material success and individualism, consumers accept sacrifice as part of their lives if they are to fulfill their material desires and be part of the consumer society (Belk et al., 2003). For example, the idea of working long hours and spending less time with the family is often understood as a sacrifice consumers make in order to acquire luxurious items and experience leisure activities (Holt, 2004; Tian and Belk, 2005). Consumers also justify financial and personal sacrifice to assert their devotion to a brand or to a consumption community (Muniz and O'Guinn, 2001). Here, the system of consumer capitalism is understood as a structural force leading consumers to personally and financially sacrifice for what they desire. This view is consistent with Weber's iron cage built around themes of discipline, sacrifice, and conformity (Murray, 2002).

§2

Conceptualizing sacrifice as a cost for worldly possessions is based on the capitalist convictions that a loss is necessary for a gain. A consumer will sacrifice part of his/her income in order to gain/acquire desirable goods. However, the present study shows that sacrifice does not necessarily indicate a cost that consumers have to endure to fulfill their desire for worldly possessions. In this analysis, informants deliberately gave up their material possessions without hope for material or financial gain. For example, Andrew, Maria, or Alison gave most of their belongings to charity organizations, Simon left his "belongings behind in a railway station" and "threw [his] money into a temple," Angie distributed her goods to "friends, to charity places, one for the children health," and Lisa left most of her belongings on the beach, free to be taken by strangers. In the excerpt below, Elisa explains that giving away her belongings to strangers without asking for any financial return was a "gift to [herself]" "that made [her] really happy" (Elisa).

§3

I kept enough stuff to survive, but yeah. Everything else I just laid out and people would come and look at things and be like, "Oh, this is gorgeous," and they'd assume straight away that I was selling everything and then they'd say, "Oh, how much do you want for that?" And I would just say, "Just take it." And it felt really nice to actually give everything away; I didn't want any money for it. (Elisa)

§4

Elisa did not ask, hope, or even accept any money for her belongings. She refused the capitalist exchange model and felt "really happy." Elisa's positive emotional feelings were not related to material or financial gain but to her emancipation from the normality of consumer society. Similarly, Lisa recalls leaving her belongings to strangers as one of her "great" "golden moment" that "felt really good." Lisa's positive reflections do not relate to material or financial gain but to giving up monetary return and mundane pleasures for a better life. For Lisa and for all the informants, the sacrifice of goods, as opposed to the selling in the marketplace, allowed them to evade the logic of the market and produced a "less materialistic view of the world" and a "Buddhist way of looking at things" (Dave) showing that "stuff isn't the marker of the self" (Angie). The sacrifice became a legitimizing force to escape from constraining societal forces and to develop a "real" identity (Elisa). Such view supports sacrifice as a "purifying act that prepares the giver for a sacred experience and creates commitment to this experience" (Belk, 1992, p. 343). In the excerpt below, Alison describes giving away her city clothes to charities so as to escape the constraining "city culture."

§5

I sort of wound up collecting. Because that was the one thing that the culture of the city really got to me and I kind of went overboard there in a way even to excess. But that upsets me that you have to have a certain look and I'm not willing to dress up like that any more. I gave all my

§6

uncomfortable city clothes away to charities. (Alison)

§7

Alison sacrificed her "collection of city clothes." She let go of the clothes she collected "in a way even to excess" because of their negatively charged meanings associated with the "culture of the city." The clothes accumulated over the years were rooted in an undesired past self who was "willing to dress up." Letting go of her city clothes without asking for any monetary return symbolizes a distance from conformity, mainstream influences and the marketplace. Through the sacrifice, Alison acquired or gained her desired emancipation from the "city culture." For Alison and for all the informants, letting go of their material possessions was a channel for emancipation from religious and/or societal norms and allowed them to become the person they "should be" (Alison). Here, sacrifice is a process whereby value is gained rather than lost. This finding follows Simmel and Bataille's notion that sacrifice does not represent an absolute loss or a renouncement; but rather a gain (Simmel, 1978; Bataille and Stoekl, 1985; Blumberg, 2004). As Simmel notes "the value that a subject sacrifices can never be greater in the particular circumstances of the moment, than the value that he received in return" (Simmel, 1978, p. 87). Sacrifice creates value in one's life. Here the accent lies, no longer on the suffering and the burden of the sacrifice, but rather on the value of sacrifice. In consumer behavior, Kozinets' (2002) research on consumer emancipation supports the notion of sacrifice as a process of gaining values. His informants from the Burning Man were able to evade the marketplace through practices of sacrifice. The sacrifice allowed for self-reflection and self-transformation. Similarly, this study shows that sacrifice allows informants to become themselves "now I feel being me; I only have what I have chosen and I am who I only want to be" (Alison). In addition, the sacrifice extended the act of disposal into the development of sacred consumption practices, which is the third theme in this study.

1.3.3. Moving toward the sacred

§1

Belk et al. (1989) show how turning sacred commodities into salable items desingularizes the objects, and thus desacralizes them. This study shows a similar process in reverse. For the informants, the process of disposal did not involve any monetary exchange. All possessions, ranging from "beautiful Egyptian ornaments" (Lisa) to the "unnecessary junk" (Andrew) were either offered to strangers on the beach (Lisa), on the street (Elisa), in a temple and in a railway station (Simon), or given to friends and/or charity organizations (Andrew, Maria, Angie, Alison). In the excerpt below, Lisa describes a thoughtful process of finding a respectful and "lovely little beach" where she could dispose of her "clothing and stuff."

§2

There's a lovely little beach and I respect the place. I love the place and yeah, I didn't want it to look like the stuff bad been dumped and some of it was in plastic bags still, um, like you know clothing and stuff like that was in bags. (Lisa)

§3

Rather than finding the process of disposal trivial and a waste of time, Lisa carefully chose a place charged with positive emotional meanings where she could "put [her] things." Lisa's process of disposal lasted three days to ascertain that all of her "stuff" had been taken away and that she "hadn't left a big mess." In her narrative, Lisa treats the beach as a sacred place; a place she loves and respects. Lisa's deliberate choice for a "lovely little beach" draws attention to the potential function of unorthodox noncommercial places as a place for disposal and for divestment ritual. When describing her belongings displayed on the beach, Lisa only used impersonal and meaningless terms such as "stuff," "things" "dumped" in "plastic bags." The positive emotional attachment devoted to the beach removed the objects from any negatively charged meanings, rendering the objects neutral and impersonal. In addition to being cleaned from any personal meanings, the

§4

depersonalized objects were also detached from profane sale and the functionality of the market logic. On the one hand, placing the objects in a positively charged place removed the negative meanings and other personalization attached to objects and on the other hand, using a place outside of the commonplace marketplace contributed to keep the object decommodifying. It is interesting to note that, contrary to previous research, the divestment ritual did not recommodify the objects (Lastovicka and Fernandez, 2005). For the informants, removing personal meanings from the objects did not lead to replacing the objects into the anonymity of the marketplace. Informants' possessions prior to disposal were impersonal and decommodified.

§5

Once divested from any personal meanings, the objects were happily passed on to other hands. Lisa felt "really happy" to let her belongings go into the hands of individuals who also enjoyed her "lovely little beach" and Elisa states: "I knew some of the things were beautiful, that made me really happy." Similarly, Andrew illustrates in the excerpt below how giving away most of his possessions outside of the commodity market made him "feel good."

§6

Nothing stands alone in this world. I think that's the Hegelian Philosophy. Everything is joined, you know, like a big massive jelly. You shake it here and another bit moves over there. Because of those, that thinking within my own self, my own personal development, I feel all is interconnected, and living without my stuff, that is what I need and I just know someone else is living with my stuff and it feels good. (Andrew)

§7

Similar to Gregson's notion of circulation and ordering (Gregson, 2007), Andrew's narrative shows disposal as a practice of moving the "stuff" along to needy hands. Andrew gave away his "stuff" because he does not "need" it and feels "good" that others can benefit from his previously owned goods. Here, goods are removed from the profane

§8

commerce and transferred to sacredness with an eternal life of transit between hands and ownership. The circulation of goods is explicit in Simon's story. Inspired by "eastern spirituality and yoga," Simon gave most of his belongings to strangers in a railway station. The choice of a railway station is linked to his childhood dream to travel and discover the world. He expressed that the individuals who would take his belongings could bring his goods to "great destinations." Further in his narrative, Simon explains leaving his profane capitalist money in a sacred temple.

§9

The ideal of the Sadu fascinated me because it's all about breaking off all ties, it's not about accumulating things, you know, material goods, prestige, standing, fame, good name and reputation. In fact, my money from my airfare home, I threw into a temple. It was about three hundred and fifty or four hundred U.S. dollars, back then. I threw it into a temple. (Simon)

§10

Giving away his money to a temple allowed Simon to experience intense sacredness. Similar to Belk's notion of sacralization through pilgrimage, Simon experienced self-sacralization via self-sufficiency and through contamination by the Indian landscapes (Belk, 1992).

§11

From the produced data, it is clear that the sacred dimension of disposal does not relate to the singularity of the objects but rather to the particularity of the people who manage to counter the myth of accumulation and extend the social journey of goods. In the excerpt below, Andrew identifies individuals who contribute to the life of objects and circulate the material as the ones who understand the self and its needs.

§12

So if you understand yourself and where you're coming from and what your needs are then you can go out there and get rid of the unnecessary junk. (Andrew)

§13

In support to Andrew's assertion, all informants expressed that they did not need

§14

"accumulating things, you know, material goods, prestige, standing, fame, good name and reputation" (Simon). Informants' defined simple material needs in terms of "survival" (Lisa), "nonmaterialistic" and "Buddhist values" (Dave), functional (Andrew), and "not a lot of things" (Maria). Together, they aligned to prioritizing sharing over ownership. For example, Dave associates his "happiness" to "caring, sharing, respect for the earth for community and for other people" (Dave). Similarly, Angie emphasizes sharing in terms of a connection with her inner self, nature and others.

§15

I look within myself, I feel this great sense of wholeness and oneness and unity and that, inner sense of connectedness. . . And, and that might be with the closed eyes. With the eyes closed looking inward. And when I open my eyes and look outwards, I feel a sense of connectedness with other people and unity with other people and I look at nature, and I feel a sense of connectedness and unity with all that is living. And all that has life in it. Um, and my identity is formed on that connectedness. I like to share with others, feel connected, there is no need to own, sharing is connecting. But it is a lifestyle change, you know, so things go with it. (Angie)

§16

For Angie, disposal is analogous to sharing and is enacted through a process of circulation. Her narrative shows sharing goods as a way to connect to people, to nature and to her inner self. Through sharing, Angie participates in the circulation of the objects. This circulation of the material conveys in her a "sense of wholeness and oneness and unity." It is evident here that Angie does not perceive disposal as a departure of goods from her life. On the contrary, disposal reflects a flow of objects. As a flow, disposal circulates the objects between hands and allows for potential return. Further on in the interview, Angie assimilates disposing of her belonging to "placing the placenta in the earth, that it would regenerate naturally and would remain

§17

part of the life cycle of nature. Things come and go but nothing really dies." Here, giving objects to strangers regenerates their meanings and lives. For Angie and for all informants, disposal is a way to be part of the world and forge sacred consumption practices. The sacred dimension of disposal is clearly emphasized when Scott describes that disposing of his unnecessary possessions "was like surrendering myself to God" (Scott). For Scott, "God is everything" and disposing of his belongings is similar to sharing part of "God" with others. Scott's experience of disposal is infused with spiritual wisdom and sacred meanings. For him, objects, by their presence and by their absence are sacred; they endorse "being aspects of God." They enable to help others and provide ways to connect to the sacred stream. Scott's notion of disposal as sharing part of "God" is similar to Angie's "sense of connectedness," Andrew's "idea of reincarnation" and "Hegelian philosophy," Simon's "ideal of the Sadu," Lisa's belief in "spiritual journey," or Angie's perception of "being at one with the self and being at one with others and at one with nature and moving in tandem with others and with life." In all narratives, disposal allowed informants to develop constitutive relationships with the sacred. Such findings support that "objects reflect, or create, a sense of power in those who use them" (Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton, 1981, p. 27) and add that disposal, just like acquisition and usage, is a form of empowerment. Through disposal, informants participate in the life of objects. By contributing to the global circulation of the material, informants become part and participants of sacred consumption practices; a consumption that binds the material, people, nature and the spiritual.

1.4. Conclusion

§1

Among the voluntary simplifiers interviewed for this study, disposal represents a transcendent experience that prefigures the death of profane consumption and the birth of sacred

§2

consumption. Thus, grounded in sharing with others and material circulation, practices of disposal can empower consumers to transform an act of pure elimination into a constitutive relationship with the sacred. As such, disposal is clearly a practice rather than an act defined as "the final physical and perhaps legal severance of control over a possession" (Roster, 2001, p. 429). In this study, the performance of disposal is a procedural and transcendental experience that entails three steps. First, informants' process of disposal responds to a desire for emancipation from unwanted societal norms. Disposal offers an anti-thesis to the ideology of storing, accumulating and keeping, prominent in mainstream consumer culture. When disposing of their possessions, informants expressed a resistance to the iron cage and material conformity (Kozinets, 2002; Murray, 2002). The process of disposal acted as symbolic departure from undesired "social shaping" (Cherrier and Murray, 2007, p. 26) and the "(over) extended material self" (Kozinets, 2002, p. 36). Second, the narratives show that the main requirement for the informants to depart from restricting societal norms and evade from the mainstream culture of accumulating was to perform a sacrifice. The sacrifice consists of letting go of material possessions without asking or hoping for financial gain. Performed in these terms, sacrifice forms the basis to accessing new and desired identities. Finally, the data provided by downshifting participants offers voluntary disposal as a prelude to participating in the circulation of the material and forging sacred consumption lifestyles. The sacred consumption was self-expressive and allowed informants to express their connection to spirituality, others, or nature. Common to all sacred consumption lifestyles were the circulation of the material and the extension of the lives of objects. Thus, disposal allowed forging sacred consumption lifestyles and conferred meanings of eternal life to the material.

§3

Building on the themes of "desire for emancipation," "sacrificing the surplus," and "moving toward the sacred," this study unsettles the notion that "to dispose of

§4

something implies the opposite of what it means to possess something" (Roster, 2001, p. 429). In this study, the process of disposal creates a connection to others, nature and the spiritual. It is a process of participating in the circulation of goods between hands and around the world. As a practice of circulation, disposal allows goods to come back to the original owner. This finding clearly shows the problem of dichotomizing acquisition versus disposal. Disposal, often viewed as the "out" process of consumption, is not necessarily the anti-thesis of acquisition. On the contrary, disposal allows for the flow of objects. It is a conduit through which the material circulates. Although Gregson's (2007) notion on circulation and order comes across as a clear advance in this regard, further research on the life of objects should provide insights on the objects "coming back" to original owners.

§5

To recognize the circulation of objects amongst consumer supports Lastovicka and Fernandez's (2005) "we-ness" path of disposal. For the informants, objects were moving along different hands. In this process of circulation, the material creates a sense of we-ness or togetherness. Individuals are connected together as well as with the spiritual through flows of objects. Yet, contrary to Lastovicka and Fernandez's finding (2005), this process does not call for the maintenance of the original owner's private meanings. Circulating material possessions from givers to receivers allowed for the transformation of private meanings into shared meanings. Hence, similar to shopping behavior, disposal and divestment rituals have the potential to imbue sacred meanings to the objects (McCracken, 1986; Miller, 1998).

§6

In addition, this study shows that divestment rituals "used to empty goods of meaning" (McCracken, 1986, p. 81) do not necessarily recommodify objects (Lastovicka and Fernandez, 2005). The analysis shows that disposal and divestment rituals can filter new societal and sacred meanings into material objects. Hence, rather than combining divestment rituals to processes of recommodification (Lastovicka and Fernandez, 2005, p. 820),

§7

new studies should acknowledge the variety of divestment rituals and their relation to processes of commodification, recommodification and decommodification. Consumers do not necessarily recommodify their possessions prior to disposing of them. Rather than replacing objects in the marketplace, informants resisted monetary exchange to fulfill broad societal and sacred meanings. It is these meanings that lead informants to forge sacred consumption lifestyles.

1.5. Biographical notes

§1

Hélène Cherrier (PhD University of Arkansas) is currently an assistant professor at the American University in Dubai, UAE. Previously, Dr. Cherrier held academic appointments at Luiss University, Rome, Italy, at the University of Sydney, Australia, and at Westminster University, London, UK. Dr. Cherrier's research interests embrace radical changes in consumption lifestyles including downshifting, voluntary simplicity, and disposal, social and environmental activism, anti-consumption, consumer resistance, appropriation and reconfiguration of consumer meanings, symbols, and usage, identity politics, and the role of material possessions in identity construction.

1.6. References

  1. Bataille G, Stockl A. 1985. Visions of Excess: Selected Writings, 1927-1939. University of Minnesota Press: Minneapolis.
  2. Baudrillard J. 1998. The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures. SAGE Publications: London, UK.
  3. Belk RW. 1988. Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research 15: 139-168.
  4. Belk RW. 1992. Moving Possessions: An analysis based on personal documents from the 1847-1869 Mormon Migration. Journal of Consumer Research 19(3): 339-361.
  5. Belk RW, Ger G, Askegaard S. 2003. The fire of desire: a multisited inquiry into consumer passion. Journal of Consumer Research 30(3): 326-342.
  6. Belk RW, Joon Yong S, Li E. 2007. Dirty little secret: home chaos and professional organizers. Consumption, Markets and Culture 10(2): 133-140.
  7. Belk RW, Wallendorf M, Sherry JF. 1989. The sacred and the profane in consumer research: theodicy on the odyssey. Journal of Consumer Research 16: 1-38.
  8. Berkin C, Carrigan M, Szmigin I. 2006. Empowerment, waste and new consumption communities. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 26(1/2): 32-47.
  9. Blumberg IM. 2004. Unnatural self-sacrifice: trollope's ethic of mutual benefit. Nineteenth-Century Literature 58(4): 506-546.
  10. Cherrier H, Murray JB. 2007. Reflexive dispossession and the self: constructing a processual theory of identity. Consumption, Markets and Culture 10(1): 1-30.
  11. Csikszentmihalyi M, Rochberg-Halton E. 1981. The Meaning of Things: Domestic Symbols and the Self. Cambridge University Press: New York.
  12. Curasi CF, Price LL, Arnould EJ. 2004. How individuals cherished possessions become families' inalienable wealth. Journal of Consumer Research 31: 609-622.
  13. Elgin D. 1981. Voluntary Simplicity: Toward a Way of Life that is Outwardly Simple, Inwardly Rich. Morrow: New York.
  14. Etzioni A. 1998. Voluntary simplicity: characterization, select psychological implication, and societal consequences. Journal of Economic Psychology 19: 619-643.
  15. Firat AF, Venkatesh A. 1995. Liberatory postmodernism and the reenchantment of consumption. Journal of Consumer Research 22: 239-260.
  16. Fromm E. 1979. To Have or to Be? Sphere Books: London.
  17. Gandolfi F, Cherrier H. 2008. Downshifting: a Theoretical and Practical Approach to Living a Simplified Life. The ICFAI University Press: Hyderabad, India.
  18. Gregson N. 2007. Living With Things: Ridding, Accomodation, Dwelling, Wantage. Sean Kingston Publishing: London.
  19. Grigsby M. 2004. Buyting Time and Getting by: The Voluntary Simplicity Movement. State University of New York Press: Albany, NY.
  20. Hogg MK, Banister EN. 2001. Dislikes, distastes and the undesired self: conceptualising and exploring the role of the undesired end state in con-
  1. sumer experience. Journal of Marketing Management 17(1/2): 73-104.
  2. Holt DB. 2004. Man-of-action heroes: the pursuit of heroic masculinity in everyday consumption. Journal of Consumer Research 31(2): 425-440.
  3. Jackson T. 2005. Live better by consumer less? Journal of Industrial Ecology 19(1/2): 19-36.
  4. Kleine SS, Kleine RE III, Allen CT. 1995. How is a possession 'me' or 'not me'? Characterizing types and antecedent of material possession attachment. Journal of Consumer Research 22: 327-343.
  5. Kozinets R. 2002. Can consumers escape the market? Emancipatory illuminations from burning man. Journal of Consumer Research 29: 20-38.
  6. Lastovicka JL, Fernandez KV. 2005. Three paths to disposition: the movement of meaningful possessions to strangers. Journal of Consumer Research 31(4): 813-824.
  7. Lewis O. 1966. The culture of poverty. Scientific American 215: 19-25.
  8. McAlexander JH. 1991. Divorce, the disposition of the relationship, and everything. Advances in Consumer Research 18(1): 43-48.
  9. McAlexander JH, Schouten JW. 1992. Consumer behavior in coping strategies for divorce. Advances in Consumer Research 19(1): 155-157.
  10. McAlexander JH, Schouten JW, Roberts S. 1993. Consumer behavior and divorce. In Research in Consumer Behavior, Vol. 6, Russell BW, Costa J (eds.). JAI: Greenwich, CT: 153-184.
  11. McCracken G. 1986. Culture and consumption: a theoretical account of the structure and movement of the cultural meaning of consumer goods. Journal of Consumer Research 13: 71-84.
  12. Mehta R, Belk RW. 1991. Artifacts, identity, and transition: favorite possessions of Indians and Indian Immigrants to the United States. Journal of Consumer Research 17: 398-411.
  13. Miller D. 1998. A Theory of Shopping. Cornell University Press: US.
  14. Muniz AM, O'Guinn TC. 2001. Brand community. Journal of Consumer Research 24(4): 412-433.
  15. Murray JB. 2002. The politics of consumption: a re-inquiry on Thompson and Haytko's (1997) 'Speaking of Fashion'. Journal of Consumer Research 29(3): 427-441.
  16. Price LL, Arnould E. 2000. Older consumers' disposition of special possessions. Journal of Consumer Research 27(2): 179-192.
  17. Roster C. 2001. Letting go: the process and meaning of dispossession in the lives of consumers. Advances in Consumer Research 27(2): 425-430.
  18. Schor J. 1998. The Overspent American: Upscaling, Downshifting, and the New Consumer, 1st ed. Basic Books: New York, NY.
  19. Schouten JW. 1991. Personal rites of passage and the reconstruction of self. Advances in Consumer Research 18(1): 49-52.
  20. Shankar A, Fitchett JA. 2002. Having, being and consumption. Journal of Marketing Management 18: 501-516.
  21. Shi DE. 1985. The Simple Life: Plain Living and High Thinking in American Culture. Oxford University Press: New York.
  22. Simmel G. 1978. The Philosophy of Money, (T. Bottomore, and D. Frisby, Trans.). Routledge and Kegan Paul: London.
  23. Thompson CJ. 1997. Interpreting consumers: A hermeneutical framework for deriving marketing insights from the texts of consumers' consumption stories. Journal of Marketing Research 34(4): 438-456.
  24. Tian K, Belk RW. 2005. Extended self and possessions in the workplace. Journal of Consumer Research 32: 297-311.
  25. Wallendorf M, Arnould EJ. 1988. My favorite things: a cross-cultural inquiry into object attachment, possessiveness, and social linkage. Journal of Consumer Research 14: 531-547.
  26. Wood JV. 1989. Theory and research concerning social comparisons of personal attributes. Psychological Bulletin 48: 106-231.
  27. Young MM, Wallendorf M. 1989. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust: conceptualizing consumer disposition of possessions. Paper presented at the American Marketing Association Winter Educator's Conference, Chicago.
§1

Copyright of Journal of Consumer Behaviour is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. / Business and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.