Sociological Studies of Consumption: Structural Determination, „Free-Floating” Lifestyles or Something Else?

Abstract

AIM OF THE PAPER
One of the most important questions of sociological research of consumption is the relationship between objective social structure and the lifestyles. In this paper, I will present two prominent but contrasting positions. One approach considers patterns of consumption and lifestyles only as a product of the objective structures. While the other position sees lifestyles as more or less independent from social constraints, thus as an autonomous principle of social structure. The paper also takes a look at how these two positions are represented in Hungarian sociological research.

METHODOLOGY
Theoretical and comparative discussion

MOST IMPORTANT RESULTS
Despite polemical differences, the existence of common research results have to be stressed (like the relative great percentage of people in Hungary, who consume on a very low level) and the existence of several common theoretical presuppositions. Regarding the latter, the most important element is, that the advocators of the two positions share the implicit theoretical premise, that it is the habitus which structures the patterns of consumption, and that these habitus (as a generalized system of dispositions) obey congruent principles, and are therefore transposeable to various areas. As a result of this, lifestyles are homogenous and without contradictions. The paper also examines a relatively new French lifestyle research, which promises to reconfigure how we think about the relationship of consumption, habitus and social structure. Bernard Lahire’s empirically grounded theory tries to re-conceptualize the problematics of social structure and (cultural) consumtion by emphasizing concepts like pluri-socialization. heterogeneous dispositions (and their blockages and activations).

RECOMMENDATIONS
Researchers of consumption should avoid all too strong presuppositions, which emphasize the homogeneity of preferences and attitudes, and instead treat the question of congruity of dispositions as an open question.