U.S. AS CONSUMER NATION FROM 1920 TO 1970.   Term Paper ID:21070 Click to get this paper

Essay Subject: Analyzes historical roots & argues Amer. values & success have always been measured by material wealth, that Amer. are both consumers & producers & that industrialization increased economic opportunity.... More...

9 Pages / 2025 Words 10 sources, 14 Citations, TURABIAN Format $36.00 Return to List of Papers

Paper Abstract: Analyzes historical roots & argues Amer. values & success have always been measured by material wealth, that Amer. are both consumers & producers & that industrialization increased economic opportunity. Paper Introduction: America as a Consumer Nation, 1920-1970 This paper will discuss the idea that Americans began viewing themselves as consumers rather than producers during the Twentieth Century. The first part of the paper will reject the notion that the self-image of Americans changed from producers to consumers in the Twentieth Century and that a fundamental shift took place between groups and the definition of success in America. The second part of the paper will argue that Americans never held distinct self-images as producers or consumers prior to the Twentieth Century since almost all Americans were consumers in some form or another from colonial times to the present. The third part of the paper will argue that success in America has always been defined in terms of material wealth and that the changes which occurred in the Twentieth Century had to do with the g Text of the Paper: The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper. Knopf, 1991), 218-34. It was only because of the revolution in production thatconsumption became the most recognizable aspect of American society. Few Americans in the Eighteenth andNineteenth Centuries dreamed of moving west so they could live assubsistence farmers; land ownership promised earnings from cash crops.While few dreamed of becoming rich as farmers, most believed that hard workearly in life could lead to somewhat easier living later in life; mosthoped that their children or grandchildren could lead easier lives. [11]Sarah Deutsch, No Separate Refuge; Culture, Class, and Gender onan Anglo-Hispanic Frontier in the American Southwest, 188 -194 (New York:Oxford University Press, 1987), 179-83. It is not fair to say, however, that Americans changed theiridentification of themselves from producers to consumers in the TwentiethCentury or that the actual change in status resulted in fundamental changesin the relationships between groups and the definition of success inAmerica. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1976.Henretta, James A. Production leads to consumptionin the individual family, even though that which is produced may be anelectronic gadget, an automobile, or an aircraft, rather than food,clothing, or shelter. Sitcoms: Selling the American Dream(New York: St. Leuchtenburg, The Perils of Prosperity, 1914-32(Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1958), 4-5. Captains of Consciousness; Advertising and the Social Roots of the Consumer Culture. The first part of the paper will reject the notion that the self-image ofAmericans changed from producers to consumers in the Twentieth Century andthat a fundamental shift took place between groups and the definition ofsuccess in America. Katz, 194-217. Americans did not somuch become new consumers as did they become old consumers with a lot moremoney than before.[7] Regardless of whether or not Americans transformed their collectiveself-image from that of producers to that of consumers in the TwentiethCentury, it is undisputed that industrialization brought about many changesin American society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958.Maier, Pauline. [14]Jones, 87-1 2. Items of entertainment, on the otherhand, comprised a very small percentage of manufactured goods and involvedminuscule numbers of workers. ----------------------- [1]William E. But even during theearly part of the Nineteenth Century many Americans did not grow their ownfood; instead they worked for money, using their earnings to buy food,clothing, and shelter. Industrial mass production became the basis of the Americaneconomy and most workers were employed in this production by the middle ofthe Twentieth Century. Religion might help the economically downtroddenmake sense of their personal plight, but Hollywood offered temporary escapefrom the reality of their lives.[13] The Depression of the 193 s stymied most Americans in their searchfor the good life, while the Second World War made them forget that searchaltogether. Religious groups flourished during the Depression in farmingareas, as people tried to cope with economic adversity. Sitcoms: The Selling of the American Dream. [1 ]Donald Worster, Dust Bowl: The Southern Plains in the 193 s(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979), 168-7 . Mass communications and advertising forged a new and wider senseof conformity, creating mass desires for the same products andlifestyles.[1 ] This new mass consumerism reached even into the poorest sections ofthe country, igniting the desires of millions of impoverished persons tojoin the mass culture of the middle class. Thoseliving in the cities held out similar hopes for their descendants. In contrast, entertainment grew into asignificant percentage of the American economy during the TwentiethCentury. While this was probably true for a majority ofAmericans, a very large minority did not produce their own food even in theEighteenth Century; significant numbers of persons worked at various craftsand trades unconnected to agricultural production.[1] It is true that these crafts and trades were largely related to theproduction of other necessities, such as clothing and shelter, or toolsneeded for agricultural production. New York: Oxford University Press, 1982.Schwentes, Carlos A. If there had been any change inthe norms concerning success it had occurred sometime by the middle of theNineteenth Century, when society no longer looked askance at lavishdisplays of wealth. The Perils of Prosperity, 1914-32. Their wages were low enough that they spent almostall of their earnings on these necessities. (NewYork: Alfred A. Similarly,relatives and neighbors often banded together to help out those in need andunwittingly served as anchors against the pull of the mass culture. Necessities became available like neverbefore and cost comparatively less money. Popular entertainment lionized the middleclass and its brand new suburban setting; those Americans who lived in thecities were told that the good life existed in the neighborhoods of single-family homes.[14] But there was no fundamental shift in American ideals. [7]Ewen, 23-3 . [3]Stuart Ewen, Captains of Consciousness; Advertising and the SocialRoots of the Consumer Culture (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1976), 23-3 . Economic prosperity allowed mosthouseholds to own automobiles and televisions while workers were allowedmore free time than ever before. It was quite obvious, then, that lifestyle was a sign of materialsuccess, even in the Nineteenth Century. Lifeno longer revolved around one's immediate community; the automobileprovided a freedom of movement previously unthought of, while radio andtelevision brought the entire country together as an audience to the sameprograms. Americans probably did not adopt a new identification asconsumers because there is little evidence that they saw themselves asproducers prior to the Twentieth Century. Mass production techniquesresulted in a reduction of the time and effort needed to producenecessities and mechanization led to widespread distribution of these itemsin very short periods of time. What is frequently forgotten,however, is that financial wealth was thought to be a sign that such aperson tended to these duties. New York: Oxford University Press, 1987.Ewen, Stuart. No Separate Refuge; Culture, Class, and Gender on an Anglo- Hispanic Frontier in the American Southwest, 188 -194 . A person was held up to be successful if he or she washardworking, loyal, and virtuous, contributing to his or her community aswell as providing for his or her family. Rather than work to produce these necessities directly for theirfamilies, workers began working in exchange for money, which was thentraded for necessities. [9]Leuchtenburg, 4-5. Perhaps the idea of a significant transformation in American socialideals took root in the in the angst of older Americans who remembered thestories of their elders concerning a supposedly simpler time when peoplewere not so concerned with acquiring luxuries and living the good life.[9]Certainly life did change in the United States between 19 and 195 . Bad Blood: The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment. This interpretation latches onto the popular notion that theAmerican economy was overwhelmingly based upon agriculture up until theTwentieth Century and that American families generally produced food fortheir own consumption. The end of the war initially brought fears of a return to theDepression, but as these fears failed to become reality, the good lifebecame a reality for most Americans. "The Concept of the Wageworkers' Frontier: A Framework for Future Research." The Western Historical Quarterly 18 (January 1987): 39-55.Worster, Donald. The Puritan foundations of much of the colonies in the northestablished the idea of civic and moral duties in American life through theTwentieth Century. Henretta, Michael Kammen, and Stanley N. Honey, I'm Home! A person, especially a man, could findhimself surrounded by more wealth than the ancient kings if only he appliedall of his talents and energies to business; at worst, he could provide hisfamily with comfort and leisure. The promiseof America was always the opportunity to lead a better life than could behad anywhere else in the world. Henretta, "The Transition to Capitalism in America," inThe Transformation of Early American History; Society, Authority, andIdeology, James A. [12]James H. The answer to thisquestion is a qualified "no;" wealth and lifestyle defined the parametersof success in America even in colonial times, although the basicdifficulties in achieving such success led to the acceptance of otherparameters based upon moral precepts. BibliographyDeutsch, Sarah. James A. The second part of the paper will argue that Americansnever held distinct self-images as producers or consumers prior to theTwentieth Century since almost all Americans were consumers in some form oranother from colonial times to the present. [13]Worster, 17 -73. American production of military material virtually won thelargest war in human history while production of commercial goods sustainedone of the richest economic boom periods in American history.[3] These facts, however, should not mask the fact that the TwentiethCentury pattern of consumption had its roots early in the NineteenthCentury. New York: St. [8]Pauline Maier, "The Transforming Impact of Independence,Reaffirmed; 1776 and the Definition of American Social Structure," in TheTransformation of Early American History; Society, Authority, and Ideology,James A. Prior to the Twentieth Century,most Americans were concerned with subsistence, producing enough basicnecessities to sustain the lives of themselves and their families. Poverty was a sign of an idle and dissolute character in a landwhich supposedly rewarded hard work.[8] By the end of the NineteenthCentury, an entire mythology had arisen around the figure of the "self-mademan," using as its real-life representatives the outrageously wealthyindustrialists and railroad barons. Schwentes, "The Concept of the Wageworkers' Frontier: AFramework for Future Research," The Western Historical Quarterly 18(January 1987): 39-55. The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763- 1789. "The Transforming Impact of Independence, Reaffirmed." In The Transformation of Early American History; Society, Authority, and Ideology, eds. New York: Free Press, 1993.Leuchtenburg, William. New York: Alfred A. [4]Robert Middlekauff, The Glorious Cause; The American Revolution1763-1789 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1982, 326-27. A popular interpretation of modern American society is that between192 and 197 Americans were transformed from producers into consumers.The production of basic necessities became less important for theindividual family as these items were mass produced and sold through retailoutlets. In the Southwest, Hispanicfamilies no longer wished to live at a subsistence level; multiple jobswere taken in order to earn enough cash to buy things such as automobilesand radios. Henretta, Michael Kammen, and Stanley N. In conclusion, industrialization in the late Nineteenth and earlyTwentieth Centuries provided the means for the realization of such hopesand dreams but there was no shift in self-image and the basic parameters ofsuccess remained the same. [2]Gerard Jones, Honey, I'm Home! New York: Alfred A. Increasing compensation by employers graduallyprovided workers with excess monetary wealth, enabling them to purchaseluxuries. There was probably little notion of success inlife, aside from the few examples of wealthy growers and merchants. Knopf, 1991.Jones, Gerard. A largenumber were engaged in some sort of agricultural work, usually growingenough for their families and selling the excess. Jones, Bad Blood: The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, rev.ed. The riches paraded about by the Nineteenth Centuryindustrialists would have outshone anything displayed by the late TwentiethCentury financial magicians. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979. Katz, 218-38. American agriculture was capitalistic in nature and the farmerswho owned their land worked to make money, rather than to simplysurvive.[5] Even the traditional image of the West as populated bylandowning farmers was more fiction than fact; most of those who lived andworked in the frontier regions throughout the Nineteenth Century were wagelaborers.[6] Clearly, then, Americans have been consumers since the colonial timesand they are still producers to this day. Yetthese groups also served as alternative transmitters of the new culture,for their members thrived on exchanging information concerning the icons ofthe entertainment world. [5]James A. [6]Carlos A. Despite the image of the American yeoman farmer which glowed abouthim, Thomas Jefferson earned his wealth growing one of the most soughtafter cash crops in the world at that time, tobacco.[4] By the end of theEighteenth Century, most American men earned their livings by hiringthemselves out for cash wages, which were used to buy necessities for theirfamilies. This idea continued to evolve throughoutthe Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries as the continent was settled anddeveloped. Although consumers, Twentieth Century Americansproduced on a scale which was fantastic when compared to previousgenerations. America as a Consumer Nation, 192 -197 This paper will discuss the idea that Americans began viewingthemselves as consumers rather than producers during the Twentieth Century. The major change which occurred during the last halfof the Nineteenth Century and the early part of the Twentieth Century wasthat industrialization added entertainment to the categories of goodsproduced and consumed by most Americans. While there were manyAmericans who were wealthy and could afford luxuries, the vast majoritywere not and could not. Martin's Press, 1992.Jones, James H. James A. Katz eds. Knopf, 1991.Middlekauff, Robert. Success in life came to be defined in material terms as wealthwas equated with success. Huge profits enabledmanufacturers to pay their workers more money and disposable income wasgradually added to the lifestyles of most Americans. By 197 , the manufacture of entertainment goods, such as radiosand televisions, represented a large enough chunk of the economy toprecipitate a crisis of confidence when the consumption of Japaneseelectronic goods outstripped that of American.[2] On the other hand, it would not be accurate to say that productionceased to be more important than consumption as the Twentieth Centuryevolved. (New York: The Free Press, 1993), 218-19. Katz eds. In addition, while it is truethat Americans did transform from producers to consumers during theTwentieth Century, it seems unlikely that this change in and of itselfbrought about a new definition of success. Rev. ed. Dust Bowl: The Southern Plains in the 193 s. Success was equated with financial wealththroughout American history; what changed was the opportunity for achievingsuch wealth and the ideas on how that wealth might be spent. Martin's Press, 1992), 7-28. (New York:Alfred A. If wealth and lifestyle determined theparameters of success by 197 , was this a significant difference from howthese parameters were determined prior to the 192 s? The third part of the paperwill argue that success in America has always been defined in terms ofmaterial wealth and that the changes which occurred in the TwentiethCentury had to do with the greater availability of such wealth and how itshould be utilized. Knopf, 1991), 199-2 . Thenew patterns of consumption would have been impossible without theindustrialization which transformed the American economy by 192 .Industrialization not only allowed the mass production of goods, but alsocreated the means of distributing those goods on a scale never beforeimagined. Any negative reaction to these ostentatiouslifestyles was born of the realization that the vast majority of Americanswould never partake of such material feasts; showing it off was akin towaving food in front of a starving man and then eating it. Henretta, Michael Kammen, and Stanley N. Henretta, Michael Kammen, and Stanley N. The question which must be addressed is whether oneof these changes involved the definition of success. "The Transition to Capitalism in America." In The Transformation of Early American History; Society, Authority, and Ideology, eds. These possibilities,however, merely reinforced dreams of wealth which had existed throughouthuman history since the advent of trade. Did a change occur inthe way Americans defined success? Ifthere was any change in the idea of success, it came from the possibilitiesof rapidly acquired financial wealth which appeared with the onset ofindustrialization in the late Nineteenth Century. The first problem with the stated interpretation is that there islittle evidence that Americans identified themselves as producers orconsumers. This change in identification presupposes that individualAmericans perceived an overall change in the national economy during thistime period. During the Depression, the government aided in the achievementof such dreams by providing some technical and professional training.While only a few would benefit from such assistance, they served as beaconsto the others, who transferred their dreams to their children.[11] Only inthe very poorest sections of the South did the population seem relativelyundisturbed by the changes in American society; in these areas, peoplecontinued to live their lives virtually isolated from the mass culture upthrough the 196 s.[12] There were reactions to this relatively new culture, especially inrural areas. Although most American farmers grew their own food during thistime, the wealthiest ones devoted their energies to growing crops whichwere in high demand in the consumer markets in the United States andEurope. If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again: Search for: or Click here to request an essay written just for you.