First Essay Draft

Is design to blame for modern day unhappiness?

Design is something that is always changing, year in year out, whether it be for the better or somehow even worse. But within the past century, our society has shifted towards a very consumerism heavy way of life. A way of life in which we simply can’t avoid given how ubiquitous it is, with advertisements and brand placements filling our screens each and everyday. There is this idea that consuming more increases our levels of happiness and satisfaction as our needs have become fulfilled by buying more of what we think we want or even need. But this is not often the case as consuming more is only a short term solution for the problem, not a long term fix. Since that happiness is often subjective, with different people having different definitions and standards to measure their happiness, I will refer to a more philosophical term, that of Easterlin (1974) ‘Happiness is not confined to economic well-being […] it corresponds to the broader concept of social welfare’. Considering our increased need to consume over the past decades, we have become much more materialistic people. Materialism by definition is ‘a tendency to consider material possessions and physical comfort as more important than spiritual values.’ Under the influence of advertisements, we’re constantly led to believe that to be the happiest and best versions of ourselves, we need to consume the most to always ensure we’re always up to date with the newest fashion trends and technology. This is where people get caught up as the creation and maintenance of own personal identities are now based around what we wear, where we eat, what car we drive etc. as opposed to how we are as a person, our actions and feelings towards others and to ensure we keep these to the highest standards possible we are sucked into a vicious cycle of consuming more just to keep up appearances.

Design plays a big part in our modern day consumeristic society, ranging from the advertisements we see on a daily basis be that on TV, in magazines or on billboards in our bus stops, to the design of the actual products themselves. Everything is designed in some way or another and then redesigned, remodelled and put out on the market again a year later that we feel the need to buy again. It is for this reason that I feel products are ‘designed for the dump’, they aren’t designed to be environmentally friendly or economical, instead they’re designed with full intentions of being obsolete within a matter of years so that the newly designed model can be put in its place. Using a range of psychologists, economists and theorists I will aim to provide evidence to support the idea that design could be to blame for unhappiness in our modern day.

Over the recent decades society has been much more consumer driven than we were for example 100 years ago, with the introduction of technology it has meant that we are exposed to a lot more brands and products everyday and the advertisements that go with them. So it’s no surprise that people on the whole have become more materialistic, growing up surrounded by a product for every need. But there is a common misconception that having more possessions ultimately makes you happier, as Kasser (2002) explains that ‘people who strongly value the pursuit of wealth and possessions report lower psychological well being than those who are less concerned with such aims’. Thus supporting the idea that having more of something usually provides less additional satisfaction (Jackson 2009), suggesting that more possessions doesn’t directly equate to more happiness. Although, it could be argued though that striving towards these external rewards, such as more possessions, is in fact a motivator of our behaviour and is fundamental to our adaptation to society (Bandura, 1977). Promoting the belief that in actual fact for us to survive and improve we need to have something to work towards such as wealth or obtaining material possessions, as if they were to be a trophy for one’s hard work and dedication. Humanistic and existential thinkers such as Carl Rogers, Abraham Maslow and Erich Fromm agree with Bandura in the sense that some level of material comfort is necessary to provide for humans’ basic physical needs, but a focus on materialistic values detracts from well-being and happiness itself (Kasser, 2002). In support of this Kasser further mentions that although most of us have some form of focus on all things material, sometimes materialism can take a hold of people’s values system (2002). This can lead to attainment of physical success taking priority over spiritual success such as forming and maintaining relationships with loved ones, all of which would challenge Easterlin’s (1974) definition of what happiness really is. As Kasser has already brought in the idea of materialism affecting our values, Klein (2005) further supports this by mentioning how ‘selling out is not only accepted, it’s considered hip’. Being materialistic has stretched past the point of it being just something for each individual’s own pleasure, such as how Bandura (1977) poses it as a motivator of our behaviour and has instead become almost a trend in a way, a battle in which people want to be materialistic to look cool and to fit in. This is the point of where design fits into the equation, materialism in terms of physical possessions is a lot about the individual brands themselves and the way they are designed and advertised. For example, wearing certain brands gives out certain vibes and impressions about the person themselves and a combination of brands can create an identity for the individual user. This is down to the already understood values that come with the brands from how they advertise themselves. But all of this comes at a cost and not just in terms of money but with change of priorities of spiritual values and their own psychological needs of self worth. People buy into these brands hoping that they will be accepted, to make them feel worthy enough and when they don’t they can become unhappy and unsatisfied, forcing them back into the cycle of buying to be happy. This is all supported by Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (see figure 3) which is something that puts into perspective the needs of each and every human being. Once our basic needs have been met, our psychological needs come into play, which is where our self esteem lies. One aspect of our self esteem could be seen as wanting to gain the respect of others and aiming to do so in many different ways. But the one that stands out the most seems to be the need to accepted by others because as Fromm (1976) puts it society has become materialistic and prefers ‘having’ to ‘being’ and so this idea that people are materialistic because they feel the need to please other people by buying into the newest trends, whether that be fashion or technology, stands true.

An improvement in the economies of most countries has led to an increase in GDP over the past 50 years, in the US especially it has tripled (Diener, 2004) and with this most would assume more money means an increase in people’s happiness and well being but this doesn’t appear to be the case. As Oishi and Kesebir (2015) pointed out that ‘for a nation’s life satisfaction to increase, producing more wealth is not sufficient’. This is also illustrated by Figure 1 (Kratzer, 2014), which shows a huge increase in GDP in the US, whilst the levels of happiness stay virtually flat. All of this leads towards the belief that having more income doesn’t automatically bring along with it more happiness but yet ads create needs and desires amongst us as consumers, with their deceptive ways that are supposed to improve our self worth. So it comes as no surprise that these have such a big impact on our physical and psychological well being, considering that on average we’re exposed to around 5000 adverts a day (Sheree, 2014). We’re led to believe that buying this or that new product will make us happier (Abdallah, 2009) when in actual fact studies have proven that in some cases it can have almost the opposite effect with degrading people’s value of self worth. In one of Kasser’s (2002) studies for example he documented that ‘strong materialistic values are associated with a pervasive undermining of people’s well being’. He mentions that there have been links with low life satisfaction and happiness also included was depression, anxiety, headaches, narcissism and antisocial behaviour, all of which supposedly fuel even more consumption with consumers thinking that shopping more will improve their mood.

A way in which brands and their advertisements create these false needs and desires for us is through the glorification of consumption, making it appear like it is an essential and integral part of our day to day lives. A perfect example of this are both H&M and Zara, their whole contribution to the fashion industry is this concept of fast fashion; pieces of clothing that are designed to be temporary both in their style and quality. The clothes they put out in stores are made relatively cheaply and of a very low quality meaning that within roughly 6 months the clothes are either falling apart or out of fashion. This forces consumers to unconsciously fall into this vicious cycle of buying new clothes more regularly without really thinking about the impact it’s having on their psychological well being. With consumers consuming more and more this can lead to an increase in materialism. Kasser (2002) supports this by referencing his study mentioning how ‘a strong desire for materialistic pursuits actually affected the participant’s day-to-day lives and decreased the quality of their daily experience’ suggesting that there is a direct link between materialism and a decrease in life satisfaction.

We’re surrounded by advertisements, be that on the TV, a billboard you’re passing by or even just within a magazine, but what most of them have in common is that they’ve got something to sell to you; be that an idea or a product. As Leonard (2010) puts it in her book The Story of Stuff the beautiful women in the magazines promise us that we’ll get a new dose of happiness when we aquire a new thing, even if it is only a tiny bit different than the one we already have. The image of an ad from Coca Cola (see figure 2) is an example of this, it skips the usual middle man and directly suggests that having a coke will improve your happiness, unlike others advertisements that may do it indirectly. Although this may seem innocent and not a direct hint saying ‘buy me’ it does subliminially suggest to those viewing it that having a coke will in some ways improve your day or your life overall. This is the issue with some advertisements is that they glorify consumption in a way that makes it seem completely natural to be consuming on a regular basis and of such a high amount. In support of this Kasser (2002) mentions that ‘social critics and psychologists have often suggested that consumer culture beeds a narcassistic personality by focusing individuals on the glorification of consumption’. The attitudes and tone of voice that these advertisements have is often along the lines if you can’t get something, you can always buy it. For example, if you’re struggling to get a date, you’re only a couple of newly bought pieces of clothing away from getting it. Or in reference to the Coca Cola ad, if you’re unhappy by a coke, and then you’ll be happy.

Identity is a something that has become a much bigger focus in recent years especially since the introduction of social media. Having the ability to post pictures of you, your on goings or even your fancy posessions online, makes it even more easier for people to become obsessed with their image and worry about how they’re percieved by others. As previously mentioned advertisements can be decieving, and with a lot of the ad world being to do with identity such as the clothes you wear, cosmetics you use, brand of laptop you have. This is something that has a big impact on people’s body image, as often brands have celebrity endorsement for their products. Now considering that regular people often look up to celebrities as their heores, inspiration etc. it’s no surprise that using these as the face for your product would definitely increase their sales by people wanting to be as close to their celebrity heroes as possible. Want to smell like Brad Pitt? Then you’ll have to buy Chanel perfume to do so. A study done by Mirre Stallen used brain scans to test whether women’s brains made the link between famous faces and buying shoes. The results showed that when the people saw the famous faces they evoked positive feelings, which in turn were linked to the product in the advertisement (Stallen, 2010) thus suggesting that celebrity endorsements to some extent do have an effect on people’s decision to buy products. A problem that can spark from is this competition between people, with social media as the weapon, it can create jealousy between users and friends with some people having products that others don’t and therefore increase their levels of materialism. As Kasser (2002) puts it ‘materialistic people tend to envy the posessions of others, feeling displeasure when others have things they themselves desire’. This is further supported by Klein (2005) talking about kids in the early 90’s says how ‘their parent’s might have gone to bargain basement but kids, it turned out, were still willing to pay up to fit in’. And to do so will try and compete, people will do everything in their power to become ‘better’ than others in the sense of owning more posessions, even if that means taking out loans to do so. This in itself can cause other issues such as debt, in America for example the debt load has risen over the years and psychologists have been called upon to explain why Americans overspend. It’s all according to new ways of advertising, paired with cultural shifts towards consumerism, that seems to be driving the trend (Novotney, 2008). The idea that advertising is a contributing factor to this issue supports my beliefs that design is to blame for modern day unhappiness as people become unhappy that they’re in debt and to solve this they ultimately go out and buy more to ‘satisfy’ their needs.

In conclusion, I believe that design plays a big role in what is to balme for unhappiness in our everyday lives given that a large amount of psychologists, theorists etc. support my reasoning. A big reason for this is the advertisements for products and the products themselves all push this idea that we should consume more, which ultimately leads to materialism. Easterlin (1974) considers happiness to be about your own social welfare and not your economic well being in which case could contradict materalistic people’s values which can have a negative effect on the person. This has been proven by Kasser (2002) who suggests people that are more materialistic have been shown to have lower psychological well being and considering that Fromm (1976) mentions that society has shifted and now prefers to ‘have’ rather than to ‘be’ it’s no surprise that Klein (2005) talks about how being materialistic has become hip with kids ‘selling out’ to brands just to be considered cool. The misconception that having more money directly equates to an increase in happiness is partly proven wrong by Kratzer (2014) as his the graph shows that as the GDP increased over 35 years the level of happiness stayed flat. This comes as no surprise considering that we’re exposed to thousands of advertisements everyday (Sheree 2014) along side being told regularly that buying this or that will make us happier (Abdullah 2009) we’re mislead into thinking that consuming is the be all and end all to our existence. The introduction of fast fashion has also had an effect on our ways of consuming, the fast turn around approach of the clothing from companies such as H&M and Zara means that the style and quality of the clothes mearly last a season which ultimately forces us to consume more multiple times a year. This glorification of consumption makes it appear as though consuming such high amounts is a normal part of our lives. It’s not just companies doing so, it’s also celebrities that endorse products that tell us that buying these things will make us happy (Leonard 2010) which all leads people into this vicious cycle of consuming more in the hope of it making us happy, these products not actually fulfilling our needs and then being fooled into consuming more to fulfil them.

Bibliography

Abdallah, S. et al (2009) ‘The Happy Planet Index 2.0: Why good lives don’t have to cost the Earth’. London: nef (the new economics foundation). Available at: http://roar.uel.ac.uk/604/1/Abdallah%2C%20S%20et%20al%20%282009%29%20nef.pdf

Bandura, A. 1977. ‘Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioural change’. Psychological Review.

Diener, E. 2004. ‘Beyond Money’. American Psychological Society. 3.

Easterlin, R. 1974. ‘Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot? Some Empirical Evidence’. University of Pennsylvania. 90.

Jackson, T. 2009. ‘Prosperity without Growth: Economics for a Finite Planet’. London: Earthscan. 38.

Klein, N. 2005. ‘No Logo’. London: Harper Perennial. 65-68.

Kasser, T. 2002. ‘The High Price of Materialism’. London: The MIT Press. 5-26.

Leonard, A. 2012. ‘The Story of Stuff. New York: Free Press. 149.

Novotney, A. 2008. ‘What’s behind American consumerism?’. Available at: http://www.apa.org/monitor/2008/07-08/consumerism.aspx

Oishi, S. & Kesebir, S. 2015. ‘Income Inequality Explains Why Economic Growth Does Not Always Translate to an Increase in Happiness’. Available at: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956797615596713

Sheree, J. 2014. ‘New Research Sheds Light on Daily Ad Exposures’. Available at: https://sjinsights.net/2014/09/29/new-research-sheds-light-on-daily-ad-exposures/

Stallen, M. 2010. ‘It’s true, celebrity faces sell shoes’. Available at: https://www.rsm.nl/about-rsm/news/detail/1601-its-true-celebrity-faces-sell-shoes/