A Fool’s Errand
When I was a teenager, having grown up in the Roman Catholic tradition, I had no concept of a Christian culture, no awareness that there was such a thing as a Christian sub-culture, and certainly no concept of a Christian youth sub-culture. That is, not until my friend Eric brought me out of a life experience that was centered on gangs and drugs at the time, and into an Evangelical community whose subculture was nearly as thick as the gang I was in. This was the mid to late 90’s, where alternative Evangelical youth culture was spreading like wildfire across the nation. My youth pastor was part of a Christian ska/punk band called “the OC Supertones” (the trumpet player on the far left of the picture).
We would go to their shows, and the shows of all the other Christian rock, punk and even rap groups who came to town: Plankeye, MXPX, the Gospel Gangstas, and Jars of Clay (who are now friends of mine). Some of my peers in the youth group started one of these Christian punk bands, and they called themselves “the Tasty Snax,” with a Bible verse about food as their slogan (the bassist is now Phoenix from Linkin Park, the guy in the red shirt of the picture on the left).
One of their songs was dedicated to the band’s awareness that it had become popular for young Christians to imagine themselves as a counter-culture. One of the song’s lines was: “I want to be different just like everybody else.” We spent a lot of money on clothes, music, concerts and products that we believed would help us both conform and not conform—conform to Christ and one another, and not to “the ways of the world,” such as consumerism (Romans 12:2).
The irony of that line in the Tasty Snax song is the same irony that Potter and Heath are seeking to expose comprehensively in their critique of anti-consumerism, “The Rebel Sell.” The authors claim that consumerism is not about conformity, it’s about distinction and competitive consumption. Rebelling against the system is the way we show our distinction and superiority in society. And yet, according to the authors, it is this rebellion against mass society that is driving consumerism. While I can hardly imagine this claim being news to anyone in 2018, in 2004 it was quite an awakening. It seems to me that the “message” of the book, if there is one, is: “Don’t be fooled by thinking you’re a non-conformist when you purchase rebellious cultural artifacts. In fact, you’re just contributing to the system.” As the authors would claim, the market does an excellent job responding to consumer demand for anti-consumerist products.
The authors address “the Critique of Mass Society” as the basis for rebellion against consumerism, and yet it’s just another way of selling goods. There was a time, perhaps, when capitalism sought to supply the demands that consumers already had. Now, manufacturers need to create demand through emotional and psychological exploitation and social conformity. Herein lies the problem with our system—we’re happy with the wealth it creates, but we don’t want to submit to its rules of discipline. As such, according to Heath and Potter, an anti-consumer / anti-conformist demand is created and nurtured by the market, thus playing a critical role in the system it is trying to jam.
Where the book is lacking is in its analysis of power differentials in today’s society, and how marginalization fuels “rebellious” spending and branding more than anti-consumerism. The struggle is not really about consumerism versus anti-consumerism. Rather, it’s about societal power and felt marginalization. Let me attempt to explain.
It may appear to Heath and Potter that, for instance, the hip-hop community was trying to create an “alternative” anti-consumer culture, when in reality it was the system of segregation that created their alternative culture—a marginalized and ignored community in society with their own cultural artifacts and symbols.
While the claim within the hip-hop community in the 90’s, “Don’t be a sell out,” was aimed to keep people from conforming to mainstream society, it wasn’t because they wanted to create a new “alternative” system (they already had one), or to “jam” the current mainstream system, but to reform the system of power in order to allow for another particular way of life to be understood and accepted. This is why Dr. Dre is praised and held with the highest esteem in the hip hop community—because he was able to get the untold “alternative” story of reality in Compton told to the world and received by mainstream society, while still embodying Compton culture. Nobody
thinks Dre is a “sell-out” for making it big. Dre’s success in mainstream American culture makes him a hero of hope to others with similar stories.
So, when a kid wears “chucks and khakis”, he can feel a little bit better about himself because the world has now received Dr. Dre as a genius. This doesn’t make him into a fool, believing he’s not conforming when he actually is. It just makes him a little more free to express himself–not as a unique individual–but as part of a sub-cultural community that gives him a sense of belonging and empowerment where there is none for him in society. The claim that the authors make that we buy things to express our individuality seems to ignore the social location out of which the claim is made. This is the imagination of the white Westerner at work, not the Asian American, the Latino or African-American. White adults may want to be non-conformists by trying not to conform to anything other than the individual self, whereas the black struggle is to not conform to “whiteness.” They have a much deeper communal identity to begin with.
The authors suggest that when we’re kids we want to conform in order to fit in, whereas when we are adults, we want to express distinctiveness and superiority (all of which is a myth anyway, which is beside the point). But again, that seems to be mostly true for white, middle-upper class men, like me. The claim does not take into account the power differential between the teenage community and adult society. It’s not that we grow out of our desire to conform. It’s that we feel the need to both conform and not conform when we are part of a marginalized community. Teenagers don’t have equal rights in society as adults. So, they conform to one another (an act of cultural empowerment), and together they try to be non-conformists toward mainstream society. The intention is not to jam the system, but to be accepted by it as they are.
This is precisely where I find the book to be not only overstated, but void of the demographic complexities inherent to consumerism in North America today. I’m not convinced that the counter-culture “rebels” were ever attempting to create an alternative to a system, or even a counter-culture to consumerism, or to be “non-conformist” in some general sense. Surely, there was at least a small pocket of these kinds of intentional “rebels,” like the “Ad-Busters” group from fifteen years ago. But at it’s deepest level, the rebellion against mainstream consumerism is more reflective of a struggle against power abuse and discrimination, not consumerism.
I will also say that the privileged community often wants to identify with the marginalized communities in our society, without having to become marginalized or suffer as they do. Even Kurt Cobain was part of a privileged community, though he suffered depression. It was the crash between his suffering and his privilege that became the crisis. His “alternative” way, in my understanding, was more about giving voice to those who suffer depression and other emotional/mental illnesses, because the mainstream system looks down on the suffering. In this way, he was a type of hero like Dr. Dre. But once you’re no longer marginalized, it’s hard to have a voice within the marginalized community. The fear in these communities is that their cultural leaders, like Cobain and Dre, will forget the voices they represent, and the pain of their experiences. When in reality, they were actually changing the system and giving voice in the mainstream to these marginalized communities.
While the authors identified the problem of consumerism well: we’re so busy producing and yet there’s no evidence of increased satisfaction, they’ve only identified another possible problem as their answer: those who think they’re rebelling from the system are actually driving it. Though the claim is backed up with thorough research, and though it is replete with interpretations of cultural phenomenon examples, the book seems somewhat irrelevant, in that the number of those who believe they are “jamming the system,” is likely unsubstantial in 2018. Nobody watches Michael Moore films anymore.
About the Author
Chris Pritchett
7 responses to “A Fool’s Errand”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Chris,
Thanks for the transparent glimpse of your journey and how the Holy Spirit moved you from gang life to a life in Christ. Distinction and competitive consumption is the key theme you pulled from the Rebel Sell authors. I discern “hypocrite” as the underlying theme in much of their writing. Just like in Matt. 6:5 when Christ is giving instructions on how to pray; He says “You must not be like the hypocrites” who give a false impression of who they really are to the world to gain recognition, status, and praise. Eternally speaking, the hypocrites of our world will only receive their fleeting praise and recognition of the world as they see it, but not how God sees it. Perhaps the Rebel Sell is subtly exposing that hypocritic nature of our consumeristic society, without really knowing they are reinforcing a Biblical principle.
Stand firm,
M. Webb
Excellent point about the locus of power. Of course, the market doesn’t care where the power lies, because it’s turning all the same. But for those rebelling, having an identity was more important than necessarily tearing down the establishment. Great insights and love all the music references!
Chris,
Your post is a fascinating perspective that gives us a different angle to view our culture from. Thanks for that. I find your idea about abuse of power and marginalization being the thing driving communities to form and change away from the mainstream culture a alternative take. Will this be the perspective you advance in your research on xenophobia? I find that power and privilege are two subthemes I keep returning to in my thinking on my work in philanthropy as well.
Hi Chris,
Thank you so much for sharing your testimony! I never knew…
Knowing that, yours is a valuable perspective, especially with the music side of your story, and where you say, “those who think they’re rebelling from the system are actually driving it.”
Absolutely brilliant, my Brother!
Chris,
I think you are cool, probably doesn’t mean a whole lot but there it is. I really appreciate your walk through the book and your disagreement really resonated with me. I truly think the “counter culture” movement is mostly about power and control, all of which is an illusion once we understand it is God who is truly in control. Thanks for your post.
Jason
“Don’t be fooled by thinking you’re a non-conformist…” this made me laugh because I totally agree that we want to be a rebel ( like everyone else) and so we purchase the items needed to pursue that. I was in a store that had what looked like some “gangsta” apparel on maniquins. I laughed at the absurdity of spending hundreds of dollars to look like a poor street hood. Keep the rebellion going :-). Thanks for this perspective on your life and our culture.
What a blast from the past Chris! I remember this song from the OC Supertones: https://youtu.be/9YQZLy_Fxus and that is so cool that your youth pastor was a part of the group and that this sub-culture made such a profound impact on you. I also appreciate your perspective on the subject where you said…”It may appear to Heath and Potter that, for instance, the hip-hop community was trying to create an “alternative” anti-consumer culture, when in reality it was the system of segregation that created their alternative culture—a marginalized and ignored community in society with their own cultural artifacts and symbols.” Very insightful and loved the personal story.