The No-Shopping Pledge In the article “My Year of No Shopping,” critically-acclaimed American author and bookstore co-owner, Ann Patchett (2017), analyzes how a ‘no-shopping-year’ makes one observant about poverty and grateful of the things he/she has. She wants people to take some time off showing and differentiate between their wants and needs. Patchett began by casually following the rule of no-shopping until New Year’s Eve when she decided to stop buying anything personal; clothes, shoes, bags and jewelry. However, she continued to shop for things related to her career like books and bookstore supplies and grocery items. During the first months of this oath she realized she had more than enough self-care and personal products. Overtime, …show more content…
she started noticing there were a lot of things she wanted but not needed. Also, not-shopping made her grateful of the things which were gifted to her. Moreover, this resolution made her comprehend the life of the poor and needy. Furthermore, she clarifies that her aim is not to make people stop consuming good and crash the economy; she is just trying to convince people to reflect upon their own lives and those of others. She concludes by quoting that “the best thing to do with best things in life is give them up.” Although Ann Patchett’s article is effective because of simple word choice and because she provides a lot of examples, it is ultimately ineffective because of lack of ethos, not using statistics and because her solutions are short-term. Firstly, this essay is effective is because of the use of simple words. Throughout the essay, the author uses simple vocabulary and diction which makes the article to understand. This makes it clear she wrote the article for a general audience who maybe not have any knowledge of shopping and fashion, hence would not know technical terms related to shopping. Moreover, she provides a lot of personal examples which most people would relate to. For instance, in March, the author desired of owning a Fitbit, however after 4 days her wish subsided and she realized she did not actually need a Fitbit, rather just wanted it (Patchett, 2017). It makes the audience relate to their own wants, and how sometimes they crave something intensely, but later their desires fade. Similarly, Patchett writes that when she was going to interview Tom Hanks she would normally want a new dress, but during this year she realized that people have not seen her existing dresses, hence shopping for a new dress when she already had few hanging in the closet would be an unwise decision, and would also be time-consuming (Patchett, 2017). This appeals to readers’ emotions, because they would have the same excitement as Patchett’s and would waste time buying a new dress for the special occasion if they were in her place. That makes the audience connect with the author easily, hence makes them understand the article more clearly and efficiently. However, the first reason why this article is ineffective is because the author does not consider the opposing side. Patchett writes the entire article without even mentioning the counter-arguments, by for example, accounting the benefits of shopping; how shopping can relieve stress and improve mental health for example. Patchett describes “I couldn’t settle down to read and write, and in my anxiety I found myself mindlessly scrolling through two particular shopping websites... I was trying to distract myself, but the distraction left me feeling worse” (2017). This implies to the readers that browsing e-commerce websites while being in a state of anxiety increases nervousness and negative emotions. However, according to Scott’s article “How Retail Therapy Is Used for Stress Management”, a survey found out that nearly 4/5 shoppers rewarded themselves by buying things, and were contented by it. This feeling of pleasure was long-term, which tells us that shopping had a positive impact on them rather than a negative feeling of regret (2018). Moreover, in her article, Patchett just uses personal examples and does not provide any statistical data; i.e. the article lacks logos. Throughout the article had swung in the direction of gold leaf tries to convince the readers to not shop just by using her personal anecdotes. Her arguments are just based on her experience and that of her friend’s, rather than using facts and figures to support her claims; this is what makes her argument unsound. For example, she says in the article that “Not shopping for a year hardly makes me one with the poor, but it has put me on the path of figuring out what I can do to help” (Patchett, 2017). Just because not shopping enabled her to figure out her life does not mean it would do the same for others. All her arguments are based on emotional appeals. In addition, the author lacks ethos. Readers are left unclear of how to end the no-shopping year, because the author herself is unsure about it. She says, “What I still haven’t figured out is how the experiment ends. Do I just start shopping again? Shop less” (Patchett, 2018)? By saying this the author implies that she herself is uncertain about what she is writing; how will the audience be persuaded and agree with her when she is unsure about her own arguments. This statement makes the author less trustworthy. Secondly, Ann Patchett is an author and a co-owner of a bookstore. This implies that she lacks the authority of writing an article about shopping because she is not an expert in this field. However, if she would have been a phycologist or someone who has the knowledge of human behavior then she would have had a sense of authority which would have made the audience trust her and her argument. To add to that, she does not provide references in the end of her article; this means the whole article is written without research, which further adds to the fact that her article based on her own experience. To conclude, the author’s uncertainty, lack of research and expertise in the field makes her arguments somewhat unreliable. Furthermore, the solutions Ann provides is not long-term. She tries to convince the audience to try not shopping for a year because of various reasons, however she does not illustrate what to do after the year ends. What if during the no-shopping year someone runs out of necessary things, should he/she continue which the pledge? After the year ends, should he/she start shopping compulsively again and then take the no-shopping vow again, or should he/she just shop responsibly after the year ends? The author leaves these questions unanswered. In addition, the article contains false analogies.
For example, Patchett writes in her article “the things we buy and buy and buy are like a thick coat of Vaseline smeared on glass: We can see some shapes out there, light and dark, but in our constant craving for what we may still want, we miss life’s details” (2017). She is comparing life with a glass, and shopping with Vaseline. She is relating things which are not in fact related. Yes, by applying Vaseline on glass, the glass becomes blur and translucent, however this does not mean shopping may blur our (spiritual) vision. On the same token, she mentions how browsing online shopping websites made her feel worse “the way a late night in a bar smoking Winstons and drinking gin leaves you feeling worse” (Patchett, 2017). Here, she is exaggerating her emotions by comparing it with a hangover. The actual reason why drinking and smoking causes painful hangovers is, as Browne explains, because "Alcohol is a diuretic, which means that it helps the body get rid of fluids. When you have a severe hangover, you're often severely dehydrated, and the body can't get rid of the byproducts of metabolizing alcohol … [which] are irritating" (Browne, 2011). On the other hand, she actually felt guilty while browsing e-commerce websites and trying to buy things which she already had in abundance; this has nothing to do with a hangover. Hence, the comparison of her feeling with the after-effects of drinking is absolutely faulty. In conclusion, using false analogies make her arguments
fallacious. In conclusion, Ann Patchett’s article “My Year of No Shopping” is effective because of its simple vocabulary, diction, audience awareness and because she uses lots of examples to illustrate her arguments. However, it is ineffective because of lack of ethos, her biasness, and because her solutions are not long-term. Hence, in order to make her article more effective she could have used facts and figures, and could have considered the counter-argument.
In his work, “Overselling capitalism,” Benjamin Barber speaks on capitalism’s shift from filling the needs of the consumer, to creating needs. He tells how it has become easier for people to borrow money, so that they no longer get as much satisfaction from affording necessities. He says capitalism can be good when both sides benefit, but it has overgrown and must continue creating needs, even though the only people who can afford these needs don’t have any. According to Barber, people are still working hard, but them and their children are becoming seduced by unneeded shopping. He states that people are becoming more needy, and losing discipline in their lifestyle. Additionally capitalism must encourage easy and addicting shopping to
Macy’s intended to deliver enhanced shopping experiences to its consumers through dynamic department stores and online sites. In this regard, the company developed a North Star strategy that allows it to improve its sales growth and to develop its existing core activities. The company’s consumer research monitors, analyze and anticipate their needs and wants based on the changing market trends. This allows it to strengthen its customer base and also helps it in identifying new markets and customers. Macy’s also identifies different styles and designs based on various occasions and events that allow it to capture the changing preferences of its customers. The company also celebrates various iconic events to interact with its customers which
Paul E. Johnson displays incredible insight on the 1820s to the 1830s in his book “A Shopkeeper’s Millennium” of how the changes in Rochester evolved socially, economically, and spiritually. It was widely accepted and was told to be brutally honest about the intentions of the elites of the time The truth that was spilled onto the pages and were revealed masterfully through his work. It took many years of tracking down enough primary sources to write the book. He touches broadly on all points of change in Rochester. Johnson gives unique insight through primary sources that shatter the previous theologies of the growing society in Rochester.
Although I didn’t necessarily put anyone first, I was able to think of my family as well as my friends as I was shopping. These items have a lot of value, but now the ones I bought for me have no personal value and the ones I bought for others will hopefully have personal value for them. Which makes me think, is that the true goal of buying items for others. Hoping that they will hold some sort of value for them.Or is it knowing that they love certain things, and buying those things for them is the point because they already have value. Although It’s not so much about “grabbing for the gaudy babble” as it is grabbing for something that has personal value to you. And personal value all depends on your memories, and the moments the object's attribute toward you, that make them worth something. Personal value will be different for everyone, but ultimately it is the most important, because it defines attention and sight as well as our lives in general. Dumpster diving is not necessarily about digging through trash, it is about finding something out there in the world that could possibly have meaning to you, and thereby cherishing
It is of no surprise to anyone that people in general, particularly Americans, tend to be overly-enticed by materialistic things and ridiculous ideals, placing more emphasis on them than things of sentiment. In “On Dumpster Diving,” author Lars Eighner develops on his experiences as a homeless man not in an attempt to defend the art of Dumpster diving, but instead to build upon the idea that a majority of people spend too much time and money on things that will not matter in a few years—they should instead focus on things that will never lose their value. Throughout the essay, he is attempting to persuade his audience that they should change their regular way of thinking and let go of materialistic things in order to live a better, more sound, and overall healthier life. To develop this purpose, Eighner utilizes juxtaposition, exemplification, and definition.
1. The main idea is not only that owning stuff is not the key to happiness, it’s also that consumers today own more than they need to thrive which directly impacts the environment. Hill illustrates the environmental impact by showing statistics of global warming today versus the past century, and how consumerism is leading to a hotter climate. Hill debunks claims of buying happiness by discussing a study where stress hormones spike to their highest when people are managing their personal belongings. Hill’s most prominent example that consumerism is not the answer is himself, as he discusses some of the most stressful times of his life being right after coming into a large sum of money and buying whatever he fancied. When Hill concludes his article, he states that “I have less—and enjoy more. My space is small. My life is big” (213).
Companies realize what people need and they take it as sources to produce commodities. However, companies which have famous brands try to get people’s attention by developing their products. Because there are several options available of commodities, people might be in a dilemma to choose what product they looking for. In fact, that dilemma is not real, it is just what people want. That is what Steve McKevitt claims in his article “Everything Now”. When people go shopping there are limitless choices of one product made by different companies, all choices of this product basically do the same thing, but what makes them different is the brand’s name. Companies with brands are trying to get their consumers by presenting their commodities in ways which let people feel impressed, and that are some things they need to buy. This is what Anne Norton discussed in her article “The Signs of Shopping”. People are often deceived by some famous brands, which they will buy as useless commodities to feel they are distinctive.
Meagher, D. (2008b). Understanding Analogies: The Analogy Item Format and the Miller Analogies Test. Pearson.
On a sunny Saturday morning with beautiful blue skies, and birds chirping, James Hamblin was in his balcony with a cup of coffee on his desk eager to write his short argumentative essay titled “Buy Experiences, Not Things”. In this short essay, Hamblin wanted to depict the fact that happiness in individuals, is mainly due to experiential purchases than to material purchases. One of the things he said to prove that point was “waiting for an experience elicits more happiness and excitement than waiting for a material good’ (Hamblin, 2014). He also stated that “a mind should remain in one place, and a mind that wanders too much is a sign of lack of happiness” (Hamblin, 2014). Instead of buying the latest iPhone, or Samsung galaxy, we should spend
Several months ago I began to suspect that a new acquaintance had some unusual ideas about money. Her Facebook posts and conversation starters revolved around living a frugal lifestyle and her approach, at least at the time, seemed quite novel. The Great Recession has certainly forced all of us to reevaluate our spending behaviors and tighten up our proverbial belts a few notches. In fact, the National Foundation for Credit Counseling (NFCC) conducted a poll in January that shows many of us are experiencing “frugal fatigue.” Cunningham, an NFCC spokesperson, says that “…66 percent (of respondents), indicated they were tired of pinching pennies… ,” but, “(t)he interesting finding is that more than 20 percent… had implemented financial lifestyle changes that they found to be positive and intended to keep them in place" ("Majority of Americans Have Frugal Fatigue”). I could not find any estimates about how many Americans have adopted extreme frugality, but the 20 percent of respondents in the NFCC’s poll that believe they will continue their frugal ways suggests the number may be very high indeed. At any rate, my new friend talked about her frugality with the same fervor as a religious convert. The only other person I knew who could rhapsodize so joyfully about reused plastic baggies and thrift store finds was my maternal grandmother. I was intrigued and inspired to research this co-culture, or perhaps counterculture, of extreme frugality.
Rosenblum begins with Ms. Strobel, a lady who had plenty of stuff, but was not satisfied. She comes to a decision to downsize her belongings and stuffs, so she will be happier and observe her dreams. Moreover, the author refers to some studies and quotations that show focus on experiences rather than purchasing products produces
Everyone has strolled past an open window, seen something intriguing in their side view, and drooled over the thought of having it for themselves. How about walking through the aisles and calculating how much money you would have after buying a few not-so-necessary items in order to pay off the bills next week. We Americans love buying things; that is just our nature. When we look behind the scenes, is materialism really all that great for us, or is it evoking more harm than good? I analyzed this issue over a few weeks, pulling resources from not only websites, but examples in my own life. Several organizations and individuals had various amounts of thoughts to contribute towards this topic, including reporters, psychologists, authors, and hobby blog writers. One common author that I have liked referencing to over many previous papers in the past is Jean Twenge, author of Generation Me and an “in between” advocate of materialism. Throughout her book, it is troublesome to understand whether or not she is strongly for or against people continuously purchasing things. But nevertheless, she offers a plethora of different reasonings as to how materialism can affect us. Another source I referenced to, the New York Time, discusses how shopping not only influences us financially, but emotionally as well. For a source supporting the issue, multiple sites’ opinions were gathered in order to help comprehend how, including US News, TreeHuggers (a personal blog), and Huffington Post. Which side is correct, though? No one is entirely sure, but the analysis will better explain a possible solution.
This is a thought-provoking book about the pursuit of material goods. Kasser is not a preacher, but a scientist. He presents his evidence carefully, and concludes that materialism is a game not worth playing even on its own terms of promoting human happiness.
Diana Kendall. “Framing Class, Vicarious Living and Conspicuous Consumption”. Colombo, “Rereading America”. Bedfords/St.Martin. Boston, New York, 2010. 330-348
Shopping is something that has to be done whether you enjoy it or not to get essentials needed. We all go places where merchandize is being sold for a specific reason. Whether you go to the mall, shopping centers, or your local grocery store, you 'll always encounter many types of shoppers. Shopping isn’t always as fun as it sounds to everyone, but it is something we often do. This is the only way we get products we need, by personally buying them. You have three main shoppers including impulse buyers, list makers, and bargain hunters.