Courtesy of John Rojas
- Postedin
- Taylar Rivers
- 0 Comments
Those who can most afford to dress—and live—any way they want are consciously emulating those who lack that freedom, making those people stuck in a situation wherein they are unwilling participants of a new aesthetic.
From clothes to housing, the “poor aesthetic” is one with the characteristics of something old and/or something used. Some things are purposely made to look old or worn, and there’s been an embrace of a minimalistic approach to fashion that fills the more financially privileged world.
There is nothing fun about poverty. Lack of resources and wealth usually makes rich people feel uncomfortable. To overcome their inner conflict, they aestheticize the poverty and the simple lifestyle as authentic and cultural. Wealthy people regard poverty as purity during materialistic times of consumption. Rich people see poor people’s lack of material prosperity as a means to be more happy and more thankful for the little things.
“When volunteer tourists confront poverty, they often become uncomfortable and seek ways to negotiate personal anxieties regarding the inequality of the encounter by aestheticizing the host community members’ poverty as authentic and cultural,” Mary Mostafanezhad wrote in an article in Annals of Tourism Research.
The danger of poverty aesthetics lies in the romanticisation of poverty. The “poor-but-happy” remarks are well known but are meant to justify the system of total inequality instead of questioning it. They do not see—or do not want to see—poverty as a problem. With this mindset, poverty or living and maneuvering life with few resources symbolizes a non-commercialized, natural and beautiful world.
An example of this misinterpretation is the disparity that exists between students around the meaning of the word “broke.” The definition of “broke” is often interpreted differently in the minds of wealthy students compared to their low-income peers. For many low-income students, “broke” is defined by a lack of financial stability.
The broke college student or hipster movement can be summarized as nothing more than half-hearted wallowing in poverty aesthetics without recognition of poverty’s real-life hardships. Completely immersing themselves in a superficial lifestyle imitating poor white culture leads them into a soldem lack of understanding towards the reality of true hardships.
Low-income people are being trivialized by the fake poor aesthetic, which is seen when higher-income people use poorness––in the form of thrift store clothing or secondhand items––as a fashion statement. Quite often, discussions of poverty in are misunderstood as equivalent to the lived experiences of low-income individuals. Being on an allowance that doesn’t allot for eating out does not equate to not being unable to afford food, and not having money to go out as much as you’d like is not being “poor” or being “broke.”
Someone’s livelihood should not be the newest trend. You cannot accessorize poorness and identify with it when you choose.
As an expert in sociology and cultural studies with a focus on social stratification, consumer behavior, and the aesthetics of poverty, I can shed light on the nuanced concepts embedded in the article you provided. My expertise lies in analyzing how socioeconomic status intersects with cultural expressions, particularly in the realms of fashion, lifestyle, and societal perceptions.
The piece discusses the phenomenon of "poverty aesthetics," where individuals, particularly those from more privileged backgrounds, deliberately adopt aspects of a lifestyle associated with poverty as a fashion statement or a means of expressing authenticity. Here's an exploration of the key concepts:
-
Poverty Aesthetics: This refers to the deliberate emulation or romanticization of the appearance or lifestyle associated with poverty by individuals from more affluent backgrounds. It involves adopting characteristics like minimalism, secondhand clothing, or living with fewer material possessions to convey authenticity or cultural depth.
-
Consumer Behavior and Social Stratification: The article touches on how consumer choices reflect not just personal preferences but also social status and power dynamics. It highlights how individuals with financial means choose to adopt elements associated with poverty as a statement of their wealth and authenticity.
-
Voluntourism and Cultural Appropriation: The piece briefly touches upon the concept of voluntourism, where individuals from privileged backgrounds engage in tourism experiences that involve encounters with poverty-stricken communities. However, it raises concerns about the superficial understanding and commodification of poverty as an aesthetic experience rather than genuine engagement or understanding.
-
Misinterpretation and Trivialization of Poverty: The article highlights the disconnect between the lived experiences of actual poverty and the superficial adoption of poverty-related aesthetics. It discusses how terms like "broke" or the act of wearing thrift store clothing may carry vastly different meanings for individuals from different socioeconomic backgrounds, leading to misinterpretations and trivialization of true economic hardship.
-
Critique of Trend Culture and Authenticity: It critiques the trend culture that appropriates poverty as a fashion statement without acknowledging or understanding the real struggles faced by individuals living in poverty. It emphasizes the ethical dilemma of using someone's difficult circ*mstances as a style statement or trend.
-
Social Inequality and Perception: Lastly, the article touches on how the romanticization of poverty perpetuates misconceptions about economic disparity and fails to address the systemic issues underlying social inequality.
The overarching theme here is the ethical and moral implications of adopting poverty-related aesthetics as a fashion trend without genuine understanding or acknowledgment of the lived experiences of those facing economic hardship. It raises critical questions about the commodification of poverty, the authenticity of cultural expression, and the responsibilities of individuals with privilege towards social justice and understanding.
