Minimalist Architecture and Interior Design in America a Mise en sc ne of Desire a Staging Ground for Action

Minimalist Architecture and Interior Design in America: A Mise-En-Scène of Desire, A Staging Ground for Action A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation with Honors in Politics. Certificate of Approval This is to certify that the accompanying thesis by Erin Rachel Lee has been accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation with Honors in Politics. ________________________ 2020 ii Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ iv List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... v 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 ............................................................................................................................................. 5 2. Background ..................................................................................................................... 6 2.1 What is Minimalism? ................................................................................................ 6 2.2 What is Ideology? ..................................................................................................... 8 2.3 Ideology, Culture, and the Frankfurt School .......................................................... 10 2.4 The Artpolitical Environment ................................................................................. 14 2.5 Some Examples....................................................................................................... 17 3. Aesthetic Politics, and Other Challenges ...................................................................... 21 3.1 Minimalism as Aesthetic Politics............................................................................ 21 3.2 “wabi-sabi vibes” .................................................................................................... 26 3.3 Lifestyle Minimalists .............................................................................................. 29 4. Political Aesthetics, and Other Possibilities ................................................................. 32 4.1 Minimalism as Political Aesthetics ......................................................................... 32 4.2 Minimalism: A Cruel Optimism ............................................................................. 33 4.3 Minimalism: A Staging Ground for Action ............................................................ 37 5. Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 40 Works Cited ...................................................................................................................... 42 iii Acknowledgements iv List of Figures Figure 1: Minimalist homes. ............................................................................................... 5 Figure 2: The Lincoln Memorial....................................................................................... 18 Figure 3: Kardashian’s and West’s home from Architectural Digest coverage. .............. 26 Figure 4: Screenshots from YouTube home tours by Lifestyle Minimalists. ................... 30 Figure 5: Screenshots from YouTube influencers’ Minimalist home tours. .................... 30 v 1. Introduction The “world has long dreamed of something of which it only has to become conscious in order to possess it in actuality.”1 - Karl Marx The mundane, common sense, and the everyday are fruitful grounds for finding latent meaning. After all, material objects are instantiations of ideology—culture, values, beliefs, proclivities, politics. Commonly-consumed goods are especially fruitful, as consumption increasingly defines individuality and societal participation today. The object here is Minimalism, a difficult-to-define term that denotes a style or aesthetic of visual arts and design.2 Minimalist architecture and interior design (henceforth referred to simply as ‘Minimalism’) in American domestic spaces will be the focus of this inquiry. Minimalism is characterized by open space, orderliness, rejection of ornamentation, and sometimes harmony with nature. It often features a neutral color palette of white, black, grey, and exposed wood.3 Minimalism is hard to pin down, but there is a certain ‘I-knowit-when-I-see-it’ (or ‘-feel-it’) that is essential to the term. This will be central here: not lofty definitions by artists or critics, but its affective, semiotic understanding by everyday people. I am interested in the everyday sense- and meaning-making that is foundational to one’s political outlook. Everyday people are the thrust behind a genuine politics—one that is democratic and egalitarian—and theory means little if it is not translatable to praxis. 1. Marx, Karl, Loyd David Easton, and Kurt H. Guddat. Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society. Indianapolis, Ind: Hackett Pub. Co, 1997, 214. 2. Ruby, Ilka, Andreas Ruby, Angeli Sachs, and Philip Ursprung. Minimal Architecture. Architecture in Focus. Munich ; New York: Prestel, 2003, 6. 3. Stewart, Jessica. “What Is Minimalism? A Look at Minimalist Art, Architecture, and Design.” My Modern Met, October 28, 2018. https://mymodernmet.com/what-is-minimalism-definition/. A more in-depth definition follows in Section 2. Minimalism has become ubiquitous in the United States; it is the design style of the moment. It can be found in domestic, public, corporate, and commercial spaces— homes, parks, offices, and storefronts. To an extent, it has become somewhat pedestrian, even expected. It has a near-universal appeal—if not just tolerability—and is often described as having a calming effect. In the aforementioned spaces it connotes modernity. In films and other media, it is often used as shorthand for futuristic or utopic settings. In recent years, the term ‘Minimalism’ has resurged in its close association with a lifestyle that follows some of the basic ideas of Zen philosophy—even though its ties to Zen have largely fallen away. ‘Lifestyle Minimalists,’ as I will refer to them, reject consumerism, live simply, practice mindfulness, and promote environmentalism. Minimalism is—ironically—also a form of conspicuous consumption. Celebrities Kanye West and Kim Kardashian just recently constructed their “minimal monastery” home for $20 million.4 Likewise, it is also found in more low-brow sources, like the mass-produced home decor from IKEA and popular lifestyle brands like Urban Outfitters and MUJI. Even Walmart sells products in this style. What does all of this mean? Is this merely a fad? an innocuous trend? What political work might it be doing? How does it relate to the ambient ideological environment (what I will call the dyad of consumerism and civic disengagement)? 4. Chen, Joyce. “Kim Kardashian Calls Her Hidden Hills Home a ‘Minimal Monastery’ | Architectural Digest.” Architectural Digest, April 11, 2019. https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/kimkardashian-calls-her-hidden-hills-home-a-minimal-monastery. 2 To impose a more rigid frame, is Minimalism in America aesthetic politics, or political aesthetics? In this thesis I will develop the argument that Minimalism—though it claims to be subversive and indeed once had subversive potential—has in actuality been captured by the dyad of consumerism and civic disengagement and is now a supporting aesthetic element of the ideological/artpolitical environment; Minimalism is aesthetic politics. But then, taking a step back, I give a wide berth for fantasy, imagination, and creativity to construct politically productive spaces—particularly via the medium of architecture and interior design. I will show through theoretical excurses how Minimalist spaces can be, if not subversive, then, generative, and how resistance can take many forms. Indeed, Minimalism can be a mise-en-scène of desire, a staging ground for action. It should be noted that this writing is largely about middle-class and uppermiddle-class consumers. All Americans are “deeply affected by consumerism”5 and there is certainly a “trickle-down”6 of consumer aspirations (e.g., designer trends percolate down to bargain bins), so this aesthetic can also be found in the homes of the lower classes. However, this group constitutes a large demographic of consumers who have significant capacity for discretionary spending. This group also sets highly visible standards for what the good life should ostensibly look like. People will always aspire to the good life, the American Dream. Whatever that looks like inspires widespread movement toward it. Perhaps manipulating what that looks like could inspire large-scale change. In a sense, the middle- and upper-middle could be a revolutionary class of sorts. 5. Schor, Juliet. The Overspent American: Upscaling, Downshifting, and the New Consumer. 1st ed. New York, NY: Basic Books, 1998, xiv. 6. Schor, 8. 3 My intellectual stance draws primarily from the work of Sheldon Wolin,7 Lauren Berlant,8 Susan Napier,9 and Critical Theory, but also from cultural studies, affect theory, semiotics, globalization studies, and leisure theory. I hope to add to the prolific genre of critical theory, which seeks to uncover the contradictions inherent to capital accumulation and commodification as well as to critique domination and ideology, and to illustrate some emendations on how this approach can be used to conceptualize our modern political/ideological context, which is more complex due to factors such as globalization. I particularly draw on Walter Benjamin’s theorizations on aesthetic politics.10 I also hope to solidify architecture and interior design’s importance to this discourse as an object of study. Finally, I entertain how political ideation might be developed in new directions via fantasy, leisure, and play. I draw examples from high-end architecture and interior design magazines and social media influencers.11 These sources provide aspirational images for what the good life looks like for Americans broadly—regardless of class. I use social media because it has become the primary medium for the transmission of culture between everyday people. These sites (e.g., YouTube, but also Instagram) are also especially visual and thus convey the aesthetics of our ideological environment quite explicitly. Images also hold some of the greatest power for the transmission of affect. 7. Wolin, Sheldon S. Democracy Incorporated: Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press, 2008. 8. Berlant, Lauren Gail. Cruel Optimism. Durham: Duke University Press, 2011. 9. Napier, Susan Jolliffe. From Impressionism to Anime: Japan as Fantasy and Fan Cult in the Mind of the West. 1st ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. 10. Benjamin, Walter. “Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction: War and Fascism.” In Social Theory: The Multicultural, Global, and Classic Readings, edited by Charles Lemert, 6th ed., 219–26. Westview Press, 2017. 11. Influencers are social media personalities with large followings. 4 Figure 1: Minimalist homes. 5 2. Background 2.1 What is Minimalism? Although aesthetic simplicity has been a facet of many cultures and philosophies (e.g., Quakers, Puritans), Minimalism is principally influenced by Japanese Zen philosophy. Traditionally in Japan, Zen philosophy becomes manifest in architecture. Philosophical concepts such as wabi-sabi (seeing beauty in organic forms), ma (emptiness, which encourages contemplation of essential forms), and seijaku (stillness, or the translation of meditation into design) are key to the design style. Altogether, these are intended to promote harmony and tranquility.12 These concepts have been influential in Western design since the 18th century.13 Minimalist architecture is also an evolutionary offshoot of Modernism, which dominated art discourse throughout the twentieth century. Minimalism is particularly connected to the Modernist Bauhaus movement of the 1920s, which pioneered utopian ideals for the future through art, design, and technology. Modernism—like Minimalism—imagines modernity through simple designs and materials that highlight the essence of architecture. Minimalist interior design follows these art and architecture movements—it is also about subtracting the inessential. The essentials of Minimalism are simple materials (e.g., concrete, steel, wood), open space, orderliness, rejection of ornamentation and clutter, and harmony with nature; form and material are simplified, less is more.14 12. Saito, Yuriko. “The Moral Dimension of Japanese Aesthetics.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 65, no. 1 (2007): 85–97. 13. Stewart. 14. Ibid. 6 Minimalism expressed a discomfort among intellectuals and artists with living in an increasingly urbanized/technologized/industrialized world. It was (and is) appreciated for its ability to provide respite from the “overpowering presence of traffic, advertising, jumbled building scales, and imposing roadways,”15 as it were, and for its ability to express alternative aspirations for what the world might look like. Japan itself has historically served as a vision of a “pastoral utopia.”16 This positive affective value of pleasure, utopia, and fantasy has ‘stuck’17 quite strongly to Minimalist objects—affect being those culturally-circulated, “visceral forces beneath, alongside, or generally other than conscious knowing that can serve to drive us toward movement, thought, and everchanging forms of relation.”18 Minimalism has suffused beyond the fine arts. No longer exclusive, and also due to the aforementioned trickle-down of taste, Minimalism has transcended class. In domestic, commercial, and corporate spheres it has become the design style of the moment. In accordance with its historical affective value, its marketing is often accompanied by such terms as ‘sanctuary,’ ‘wellness,’ ‘relaxation,’ ‘pristine,’ ‘sophistication,’ and ‘refinement.’ Lifestyle Minimalists have a sizeable community—especially online. It is a subculture or even quasi-counterculture movement, but it is not organized in any traditional sense, is variously interpreted, and Minimalists practice on a spectrum. Followers—largely Millennials—‘minimize’ their spending, wardrobes, and even the size 15. Ostwald, Michael J, and Josephine Vaughan. The Fractal Dimension of Architecture, 2016, 316. 16. Napier, 8. 17. Ahmed, Sarah. “Happy Objects.” In The Affect Theory Reader, edited by Melissa Gregg and Gregory J Seigworth. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2010. 18. Gregg, Melissa, and Gregory J Seigworth. The Affect Theory Reader. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2010, 1. 7 of their homes and incomes. They explicitly reject consumerism in the interest of promoting peace of mind and often environmentalism. Marie Kondo has become a household name because of her teachings in Minimalist living. Now, before interrogating Minimalism, it is necessary to understand the ambient ideological/political/historical context in the US today. 2.2 What is Ideology? There are many nuanced but similar definitions of ideology. I will use a generalized Marxist understanding of ideology. Ideology is the affixing of meaning (values, beliefs, ideas) and world view onto experience; it is an act, a lived and living relation that is firmly sedimented yet spontaneous. It thrives at the level of the unconscious—it is the common sense, the taken for granted, the normal frame of reference. Ideology saturates everyday life and discourse; it is not confined—as often thought—to the platforms of political parties. It is expansive and total and yet it is anonymous.19 It is integral to sense- and meaning-making. Ideology refracts how one perceives oneself to be a political subject in relation to the phenomena of the world—how one should understand oneself, how one should relate to others, and how one should receive phenomena. Ideology seems to be reality. But in actuality, for the political subject, reality is mediated by ideology; ideology masquerades as universal, permanent truth while actually being historically specific. Ideology obscures reality in such a way that it supports the powerful and the prevailing system. Yet it is not conspiratorial. It is the product of a set of dynamic social relations that encourage 19. Hebdige, Dick. Subculture: The Meaning of Style. Routledge, 1979, 11; see also Barker, Chris. Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. 4th Edition. Los Angeles ; London: SAGE, 2012. 8 equilibrium in the system as well as individual profit accumulation. It is then made manifest in political and cultural institutions such as the format of government, the family, etc.20 It is itself a system—a system of representation. As Louis Althusser explains, these representations are “usually images and occasionally concepts, but it is above all as structures that they impose on the vast majority of men.”21 Building off of these ideas, Antonio Gramsci theorized how ideology maintains social dynamics of power and powerlessness. He posited that ‘hegemony’ is how dominative societies are maintained despite ostensibly obvious inequalities. Hegemony refers to a situation wherein an alliance of social groups dominates all others—not through forceful imposition or coercion, but through a gradual process of manufacturing and winning consent such that their power appears natural and inevitable. Subordinate groups are confined within the ideological space constructed by the ruling group that does not appear to be constructed; the ruling ideas become everyone’s ideas—the ruling ideas being those that undergird capitalism.22 Returning to the example of the cultural institution of the family, families under capitalism are rationalized economic units. In the ‘nuclear family,’ there are gendered and heteronormative, common-sense expectations for who completes which labor to sustain the family (work outside the home for the husband, reproductive labor for the wife) whilst the children are educated to become future economic participants themselves. These hegemonic standards for family life appear natural although alternatives exist. 20. Hebdige, 12. 21. Ibid. (emphasis added). 22. Hebdige, 16. 9 A few more important points must be made about ideology before continuing: First, under capitalism, freedom of action is replaced with instrumental decision making. Subjects can only choose from the ideological landscape set before them; they can react but not act independently. Second, in order to perpetuate itself, capitalism presents itself as the best—or only—possible way of life through the system of representation. The ultimate “goal is that human thoughts and actions do not go beyond capitalism, do not question and revolt against this system and thereby play the role of instruments for the perpetuation of capitalism.”23 Utopian thinking is discouraged and even precluded by the ideological environment. Third, culture is strongly bonded with the commodity form and capital; culture is created to be sold and consumed.24 2.3 Ideology, Culture, and the Frankfurt School “Not all art is political, but all politics is aesthetic.”25 - Crispin Sartwell “All efforts to render politics aesthetic culminate in one thing: war.”26 - Walter Benjamin The Frankfurt School built upon these ideas of ideology and hegemony. The Frankfurt School is known for being the origin of Critical Theory, an important and influential tradition within Cultural Marxism.27 The Critical Theorists critically analyzed culture and speculated normatively about societal and political development through an open, Neo-Marxist lens. They saw culture as being one of the ways that ideology 23. Geuss, Raymond. The Idea of a Critical Theory: Habermas and the Frankfurt School. Cambridge: Cambridge, 1981, 11. 24. Ibid. 25. Sartwell, Crispin. Political Aesthetics. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 2010, 1 26. Benjamin, Walter. “Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction: War and Fascism.” In Social Theory: The Multicultural, Global, and Classic Readings, edited by Charles Lemert, 6th ed., 219–26. Westview Press, 2017, 206. 27. This is not the same as the Cultural Marxism misused by the Right in recent years: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/19/cultural-marxism-a-uniting-theory-forrightwingers-who-love-to-play-the-victim. 10 particularly evinces itself and thus as an avenue for critiquing and challenging it. They particularly built on the idea of ideology being ‘images’ and ‘representation,’ using the term ‘aesthetics’ to understand this broadly. For the Frankfurt School, aesthetics obscured “the actual truth of reality, but more specifically the true realities underlying power structures, social, cultural, or economic ones that governed society but were invisible to all but the most erudite of intellectuals and intellectually engaged artists.”28 Political aesthetics/aesthetic politics has since become something of a genre in the study of politics. Although today, [i]n everyday language, ‘aesthetic’ has a refined, almost effete connotation that seems to make it irrelevant to everyday experience [...] in its broadest sense, every act of awareness, whether of internal states or of the external environment, has an aesthetic component. [...] [A]esthetic dimension is not a rarefied frill but a vitally important aspect of how we relate to the world.29 In recent years, ‘aesthetic’ has been used as a synonym for ‘style’ in popular culture. As an approach, aesthetic politics offers unique insight into what is usually taken to be the material of political science: texts and speeches, but also architecture, clothing, and styles of embodiment and movement.30 It is principally concerned with their affective/semiotic value and as such allows access to what is not totally encompassed or made intelligible by language.31 28. Gage, Mark Foster, ed. Aesthetics Equals Politics: New Discourses across Art, Architecture, and Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2019, 4-5. 29. Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly, and Eugene Halton. The Meaning of Things: Domestic Symbols and the Self. Cambridge [Eng.] ; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1981, 176 (emphasis added). 30. Sartwell, 2. 31. Ibid. 11 Walter Benjamin, a leading member of the Frankfurt School, conceptualized ‘aesthetic politics’ to understand fascism in Nazi Germany. Conventionally and simplistically, an aesthetic politics means that a political system appears to be productive for the masses, but does not substantively affect their rights or material conditions. This was essential to the maintenance of fascist regimes in which the masses expressed themselves politically, which seemed to be progress, but they remained subordinate. The ruling group aestheticized the political environment. Aesthetic politics can refer not only to such an overall ideological/aesthetic environment produced by a political system such as fascism, but can also be more literal, referring to more tangible, aesthetic tools used by the regime. For instance. “[t]he emotive paraphernalia of fascism—propaganda films, marching troops, flags, insignia, and the rest,” which were used “to marshal collective experience as a powerful social force.”32 They helped to convey a message of unity, power, and totality. These are all elements of the overarching ‘design style’ of the regime. The antithesis of aestheticizing politics is politicizing art. Politicizing aesthetics/art means using art as a political tool to galvanize the masses in order to challenge dominative structures.33 Political art challenges dominative structures by providing critical distance; it promotes the capacity to think outside of one’s highlycurated political reality. In Art Under A Dictatorship, Hellmut Lehmann-Haupt put it best: [a]rt that is the expression of individual search, of experiment, of intuitive play, art that penetrates the surface of the visual world, that is prophetic, sensitive, apprehensive, art that challenges the individual, that demands concentration, 32. Manderson, Desmond. “Here and Now: From ‘Aestheticizing Politics’ to ‘Politicizing Art,’” 2016. http://www.helsinki.fi/nofo/NoFo13_Manderson.pdf, 3. 33. Benjamin, 206-207. 12 effort, art that heightens perception, sharpens the eye, nourishes thought—that art cannot be tolerated by the dictator. He must eliminate it. In its place he must put art that requires no visual effort, that is easily read by all, easy on the eye and on the mind, unproblematic. He must demand art that creates the illusion of a secure, serene world, that hides the sinister motives and the terror.34 Such art put in place by the dictator might be the aforementioned ‘emotive paraphernalia of fascism’ or even, as I will argue, Minimalism. Central to the theory of aesthetic politics is the historical materialist notion that sensory experience precedes (or precludes) emancipatory thinking. Aesthetics is about the shared human sensory capacity and how that capacity either produces or forbids the power to be a political actor.35 However, emancipation does not result from merely revealing one’s predicament. Instead, it truly comes to fruition when the image of another way of life is realized: “Emancipation starts at the moment when it is not revealing inequality, but affirming equality.”36 This will be explored further in Section 4. Notably, Benjamin understood fascism to be the introduction of aesthetics into political life, but by no means the only environment in which it can exist. More recent scholars understand its suffusion into ordinary politics to be more complete. In the section that follows I will outline the ambient ideological context—or what is also referred to as the ‘artpolitical environment’ by aesthetic politics scholars—in the US today, which is more nuanced than that classic proletariat vs. bourgeoisie trope, and also differs from the conventional and notorious totalitarianism that aesthetic politics was originally created to conceptualize; next, I will outline what I call the dyad of consumerism and civic disengagement. 34. Sartwell, 21-22. 35. Gage, 12. 36. Gage, 22. 13 2.4 The Artpolitical Environment “To be is to have.”37 - Georges Gusdorf The US’ artpolitical environment has to do with its unique mix of liberal democracy, apathetic demos, superpower status, late capitalist stage of economic development, and hyper-materialism. The United States today faces a crisis of democratic values. Sheldon Wolin diagnoses and articulates this problem with his concept of ‘inverted totalitarianism.’ Inverted totalitarianism is also approximated by terms such as neoliberalism, late capitalism, corporate fascism, consumer democracy, post-Fordism, and “the contemporary mutation of capitalism we contend and live with.”38 The older, conventional totalitarianisms—such as those described by Hannah Arendt39—differ from their inverted form in that it is the aggregate product of many small, unintentional decisions rather than the direct will of an individual or group with singular ideological motivations. It is more “gaseous,” “dispersive,” and “open”40 than the strict enclosed model of capitalism as a dominative structure. Its dispersive nature is exactly what makes it so invisible—and so insidious. Two of its core tenets are ‘antidemocracy’ and ‘elite rule.’41 Antidemocracy refers to the demobilization of the populace, and in effect the deconstruction of the demos. The people are too occupied by long working hours (and 37. Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton, xi. 38. Kumm, Brian, and Corey Johnson. “Subversive Imagination: Smoothing Space for Leisure, Identity, and Politics.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Leisure Theory, 891–910, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-56479-5_50, 896. 39. Arendt, Hannah. The Origins of Totalitarianism. Boston, Mass.: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2011. 40. Kumm and Johnson, 902. 41. Wolin, 239. 14 thus a lack of leisure time) and uncertainty of employment to be politically engaged. Instead, political engagement takes the form of sporadic voting or even political consumerism. The populace feels disenfranchised by their government, and also that their individual power to effect change is limited. Stability and self-interest are preferred over change.42 Elite rule refers to the surfeit of corporate economic, social, and political power. Governance is transformed into an elite space requiring special background, skills, and education instead of the domain of everyday people. Inverted totalitarianism operates via a ‘managed democracy,’ a political system that produces the illusion—or aesthetic, one might say—of a flourishing democracy; democracy serves a mere “rhetorical function.”43 It is a system wherein inequality and political stagnation seem natural and inevitable, and wherein elections have little potential to alter the allotment of power.44 As Wolin explains, “[i]ts genius lies in wielding total power without appearing to, without establishing concentration camps, or enforcing ideological uniformity, or forcibly suppressing dissident elements so long as they remain ineffectual.”45 This is still a new and contested concept, but even if one would not go so far as to call the United States— ‘The World’s Greatest Democracy!’—a totalitarian-esque state, it is difficult to ignore the vast economic inequality, the qualities of meritocracy, the outsized influence of corporations (read: citizens) especially on our ‘two party’ system, the widespread practices of state-sponsored domestic surveillance, the excessive emphasis on military 42. Ibid. 43. Wolin, 131. 44. Wolin, 239. 45. Wolin, 57. 15 might, the creation of a foreign national enemy (e.g., ‘terrorists’), and the current administration’s proclivity for more overtly authoritarian practices. Although the foundational problem is aesthetic politics, not consumerism, consumerism is an important supporting apparatus in the ideological environment. ‘Citizens’—now consumers—are placated by expanding commercial choices, even while their political choices are reduced. Consumption has increased dramatically in recent decades alongside the United States’ ascent to hegemonic world leader, the rise and fall of the Cold War, and the blooming of globalization. For middle-class Americans especially, the American Dream has grown to now include a larger home, a second home, multiple cars, vacations, and the latest in technology and fashion. Throughout the latter half of the twentieth century and continuing on today, [d]efinitions of the ‘good life’ and even of the ‘necessities of life’ continued to expand, even as people worried about how they could pay for them. What was going on? The economic trend was a diverging income distribution. The sociological trend was the upward shift in consumer aspirations and the vertical stretching out of reference groups. They collided to produce a period of consumer anxiety, frustration, and dissatisfaction.46 The political trend was the diminishing of civic engagement as Americans turned inward; citizens became consumers, discontent is directed toward personal financial shortcomings. In this dyad, each element necessarily feeds into the other. Consumerism stretches and strains the fabric of civic life. Indeed, consumerism and managed democracy are interwoven, mutually reinforced. This scaffolding reinforces the structure of capitalism that underlies all relations. Altogether this results in ‘civic demobilization.’ At their core, the two elements of the dyad share a necessary performativity—performance of flourishing, of success. 46. Schor, 11-12. 16 Subverting this bipartite structure is necessary to the cause of promoting a more democratic, egalitarian, and sustainable nation. This is especially critical now as the world must face the climate crisis head on. 2.5 Some Examples The aesthetics of inverted totalitarianism amount to the illusion of flourishing democracy. Some of the aesthetic elements are, for instance, going to the voting booth on Election Day and receiving an ‘I voted’ sticker, or marching in a political demonstration. They feel validating and appear to implement political desires, but do little to change conditions on their own or to break out of the prevailing system. The aesthetic can also be seen in architecture. US government buildings are neoclassical, meaning they emulate the canons of Ancient Greek style—Greece being the origin of democracy. Government buildings like the White House are symmetrical, perfectionist, and formulaic, with columns and a stark white exterior. This monumental state architecture semiotically projects notions of democracy, rationality, power, solidness, an imposing inevitability as well as a long history. President Donald Trump’s “big beautiful wall” might also be considered aesthetic. 17 Figure 2: The Lincoln Memorial. This context has everything to do with why I have decided to focus on architecture and interior design out of everything that could be studied in the artpolitical environment. Architecture and interior design have special qualities that make them a fruitful site for investigating hidden ideology. This is because architecture is quite literally the manifestation of the way we want to build our society. It is world-building in a very concrete sense. It is an incredibly idealistic, if not merely a materially realistic, articulation of who we are and strive to be. It molds how we move, learn, feel, and live. It is profoundly life-shaping. The classic example of how architecture implicitly and aesthetically conveys ideology—shaping us—is the classroom. In a lecture-style classroom, desks face inward, thus directing attention toward the professor who has singular authority over knowledge. The architecture shapes and reaffirms collective understandings of the appropriate power dynamics. 18 Architecture and interior design in homes are especially connected to the common sense-ness of ideology because it is in this constructed setting that we spend every day. It is unlike a sports game, religion, or politics happening in Congress, which are all cultural facets that occur more sporadically and are less a part of our everyday lives. Additionally, the home seems more personal, intimate, and private. The home is the epitome of where we think we have autonomy, but even choices about the home exist within a prescribed set. Even so, there remains a relatively large amount of agency in the home. Indeed, [d]efinitions of the ‘good life’ and even of the ‘necessities of life’ continued to expand, even as people worried about how they could pay for them. What was going on? The economic trend was a diverging income distribution. The sociological trend was the upward shift in consumer aspirations and the vertical stretching out of reference groups. They collided to produce a period of consumer anxiety, frustration, and dissatisfaction.47 I am interested in “[t]he symbolic environment of the household.”48 According to some scholars of consumption, consumption involves a great deal of internal satisfaction rather than merely being an external marker of status. Indeed, “in contrast to what occurred in ancient and traditional societies, modern consumers tend to construct the context of their personal enjoyment through mixing up and manipulating illusions, thus reproducing their ‘day-dreams,’ primarily through objects. Objects are appreciated above all for their meaning and their images”49—they are a means of manifesting the self as well as being aspirational. What might “day-dreams” of Minimalism indicate? What might Minimalism yearn for? 46. Schor, 11-12. 48. Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton, xii. 49. Sassatelli, Roberta. Consumer Culture: History, Theory and Politics. 1st ed. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, 2007, 17. 19 To conclude this section, Minimalism as a cultural object is uniquely interlaced with the dyad. Its underlying philosophy is concerned with materialism and individualism. It exists at the crossroads of some of the most pressing political issues of our time: consumerism, civic disengagement, environmental degradation, and globalization among them. The question going forward will be: Is Minimalism in domestic spaces aesthetic politics or political aesthetics? Is it merely another supporting element of the artpolitical environment, or does it have the potential to subvert dominative and exploitative structures—the dyad of consumerism and civic disengagement? What political work is encouraged or foreclosed by Minimalism? The remainder of this writing will develop the argument that, through a Critical Theory lens, Minimalism does not challenge the dyad; it is aesthetic politics. However, what follows are theoretical excurses, a somewhat meandering exploration, of other political possibilities. These focus on the notion of fantasy, which is often used as an escape from enclosed ideological environment—to various ends. 20 3. Aesthetic Politics, and Other Challenges 3.1 Minimalism as Aesthetic Politics The following section will explore the ways in which Minimalism is a supporting element in the artpolitical environment. In other words, why it does not subvert the dyad of consumerism and civic disengagement. This section will contain three main critiques of the subversive potential of Minimalism: 1) Minimalism has been perverted into just being an aesthetic, thus diluting its actual message and potential to effect change. An aesthetic that is principally about rejecting consumerism has been turned upside down. This renders it inert and instead about conspicuous consumption, thus supporting the dyad. This also results in... 2) Minimalism giving the impression of the US flourishing, being futuristic, etc. when the country and its politics are actually dysfunctional in many ways. And finally, 3) Minimalism makes people think that building their fantasy utopian world is as easy as buying Minimalist-style consumer goods. Aspirational images of the good life solidify this. I will begin by applying the dialectic model, a foundational part of Critical Theory, in order to understand Minimalism’s perversion. It is a tool to conceptualize how capitalism retains its ability to dominate and how we all contribute to its perpetuation despite any resistance or tension. Dialectical reasoning helps us understand this seeming contradiction by naming the phenomena in our ambient ideological environment. These phenomena tend to be ‘normal’ and anonymous. Following the formula of, for instance, 21 ‘misery/wealth,’ ‘workers/capitalists,’ and ‘use value/exchange value,’50 the situation here is, Minimalism/consumerism These two seeming opposites both exist under the dyad. These are two opposing ideologies; Minimalism’s ideological components could challenge consumerism, yet they are both able to exist—and the dyad remains dominant—because “[t]he tension between opposing poles can be resolved in a process that Hegel and Marx called ‘Aufhebung’ (sublation) and ‘negation of the negation’: a new/third quality or a new system emerges from the contradiction between two poles. Sublation can take place at different levels of society, either relatively frequently in order to enable a dynamic of domination or infrequently in situations of revolution when domination is questioned. In capitalism, contradictions are frequently sublated in order to enable capital accumulation.” So while ‘use value/exchange value => value,’51 Minimalism/consumerism => Minimalist-style consumer goods In order to sublate the threat of Minimalism, the aesthetic is taken and incorporated into the ideological environment. The original ideology is largely left behind. This allows it to still exist under the prevailing system while also rendering it inert—again, inverted totalitarianism does not need to enforce its will, but rather renders dissident ideas ineffectual and seemingly normal. Although the positive affective value of Minimalism remains, its material qualities differ from its earlier forms—it is cheaply made, mass- 50. Fuchs, Christian. Critical Theory of Communication: New Readings of Lukács, Adorno, Marcuse, Honneth and Habermas in the Age of the Internet. First published 2016. Critical Digital and Social Media Studies. London: University of Westminster Press, 2016, 11-12. 51. Fuchs, 11. 22 produced, and is sold acontextually. Its aesthetic value is forefronted, and hegemony maintained. Nicos Poulantzas52 elaborated on how hegemony maintains equilibrium even when a dissident factor such as Minimalism threatens to compromise the balance in favor of the dominated as opposed to the dominant. Although he wrote about how the state (i.e., the political sphere) facilitates such processes, it seems sensible that this idea could be superimposed onto the corporate state given its current predominance under the dyad. The corporate state makes certain compromises (e.g., financial sacrifices) such that the overall equilibrium of the dyad can be maintained. Meaning, although corporation’s corrupting of Minimalism (i.e., producing Minimalist-style consumer goods) has resulted in some being more Minimalistic (i.e., buying less/political consumerism), overall they have subdued the threat of this competing ideology which might actually be in the interest of the dominated. Corporations have also managed to turn it into an additional avenue of profit. As a result, capitalists profit from the popular style, citizens/consumers are better able to cope with the increasing stresses of living in inverted totalitarian society (perhaps akin to ‘regimented leisure time’) not only via the pleasure of consumption but also through the placative affective properties, and the machine rolls on. The result is also placation in the face of other urgent problems—such as environmental degradation—in addition to worsening them. In this way, not only has Minimalism’s subversive potential been captured by the dyad, but it has been weaponized against its original values. It has been reduced to its 52. Poulantzas, Nicos. Political Power and Social Classes. 2d impression. London: Verso, 1982, 192. 23 commodity form—fetishized. Meaning, Minimalism creates the appearance of positive change against the dyad and ancillary problems without actually effecting change. It is indeed “art that requires no visual effort, that is easily read by all, easy on the eye and on the mind, unproblematic.” It is “art that creates the illusion of a secure, serene world, that hides the sinister motives and the terror.”53 It is a fantasy that distracts from actual change. It is aesthetic politics. Indeed, it is an aesthetic politics unique to this context—to this epoch in American history—because Minimalism is deeply intertwined with consumerism, recent ideas of that good life called the American Dream, and likewise with illusions of personal freedom. Although Minimalism is not yet in every home, it appears to be on that trajectory because of the overwhelming availability of Minimalist-style consumer goods and the fact that it has been solidified as being aspirational. Also important is the dimension of mass-production; in his seminal essay “Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” Benjamin highlighted that technologization can allow for democratization of art, but if it is in the hands of the wrong few, it can lead to the opposite;54 technologization of art— for instance, through mass production techniques—can further foreclose one’s political imagination. This is because it is, in effect, mass-producing ideology. What does it mean for every American home to basically look the same? What political ideation about what life should/could be might that occlude? This process overall could be compared to the notorious and well-studied commodification of punk. The once-subversive, subcultural style is now mainstream. 53. Sartwell, 21-22. 54. Benjamin. 24 “[P]unk has been continuously appropriated as a commercial design style. And in fact this displays the reversal that might befall any set of artpolitical forms or gestures.”55 In essence, punk’s political aesthetics were rendered inert by turning them into aesthetic politics. Doc Martens, for instance, are now worn by punks, blue-collar workers, and celebrities alike. Subculture is diluted to mass culture. The subversive ideas are left behind. This aesthetic has effectively been depoliticized. However, Minimalism’s capture by the dyad is even more troubling than the loss of punk. Not only has it been appropriated by capital, but it was an entirely new, foreign ideology from another country. Unlike punk, whose style involves perversion of everyday objects (safety pins, leather, etc.) already in the ambient environment, Minimalism was an entire set of new imported objects that brought new ideas. Even Marie Kondo, Japanese author of four books on minimizing and organizing one’s life such as The Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up and preacher of Minimalism, has started a company to sell Minimalist-style goods. This is a crude example of the homogenization theory of globalization—the neoliberal ideology of the US has arguably suffused throughout the world. The homepage of her website prominently features her quote, “The goal of tidying is to make room for meaningful objects, people and experiences. I can think of no greater happiness in life than being surrounded only by the things I love.”56 Even Kondo is consumerist. It is consumerism narrowed, not subverted. It is hardly “life-changing,” at least not beyond the surface level. 55. Sartwell, 13. 56. KonMari | The Official Website of Marie Kondo. “Konmari.” Accessed April 8, 2020. https://konmari.com/ (emphasis added). 25 3.2 “wabi-sabi vibes” What follows is a more in-depth example of the extent and nature of Minimalism’s depoliticization. Notorious maximalists Kim Kardashian and Kanye West recently renovated their home into a $20 million “minimal monastery” that is now worth a reported $60 million.57 It has been idolized by their social media followers and lauded by Architectural Digest as a “minimalist masterpiece.”58 Their home is a prime example of what the apex of Minimalist design/consumer goods has become. Figure 3: Kardashian’s and West’s home from Architectural Digest coverage. 57. Chen. 58. Architectural Digest Instagram Post, (@archdigest), February 3, 2020. 26 To pull directly from Architectural Digest, ‘Kanye and Kim wanted something totally new. We didn’t talk about decoration but a kind of philosophy about how we live now and how we will live in the future. We changed the house by purifying it, and we kept pushing to make it purer and purer,’ the designer explains.59 […] West proudly links his decor to the ‘wabi-sabi’ philosophy60. ‘You are familiar with the cultural pursuit of wabi-sabi in Japan?’ Letterman asks West as he admires a set of decorative ceramics in the home’s living room. ‘That’s what this house is: wabi-sabi vibes,’ West responds with a grin. […] West also opens up about how he uses art as a way to navigate through society and make a statement. ‘I think I use art as a superpower to protect myself in a capitalistic world,’ he says. ‘And, also, I can use it to make money.’61 Although West is referring to his musical career, this quote also captures the deep irony of luxury Minimalism. It is in a sense used to self-inoculate against the negative effects of capitalism and other dominative structures whilst doing little to challenge them on a broader scale. It is calming, futuristic, utopic. It is precisely the “vibe,” even an arguably good vibe to strive for, but misses the point; it is materially inconsistent with the values. There is no mention of sustainable building materials, reducing the footprint of the house, or otherwise minimizing their life. The result is that their fans and others seek to emulate the style with little regard for what wabi-sabi or Minimalism originally meant—or could mean. Thus, consumers strive to purchase Minimalist-style consumer goods from wholly contradictory sources, from Restoration Hardware to Crate and Barrel to IKEA to 59. Rus, Mayer. “Step Inside Kim Kardashian West and Kanye West’s Boundary-Defying Home | Architectural Digest.” Architectural Digest, February 3, 2020. https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/kim-kardashian-kanye-west-home. 60. Again, wabi-sabi roughly translates to ‘wisdom in natural simplicity.’ 61. Chen, Joyce. “Kanye West Explains the ‘Wabi-Sabi’ Aesthetic of His Minimalistic Hidden Hills Home.” Architectural Digest, June 7, 2019. https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/kanye-weston-wabi-sabi-aesthetic-of-hidden-hills-home. (emphasis added). 27 Walmart, which mass-produce Minimalist goods to follow the trend. ‘Before and after’ virtual tours of renovated apartments are very popular to make and view on YouTube. YouTube influencers completely renovate their homes, tossing the old and bringing in the new—often from sources that cheaply mass-produce the Minimalist-style consumer goods. This demonstrates the enormous power of consumer aspirations about the good life. Although West and Kardashian are by no means the first of their kind to use Minimalism, they are a striking example. If this is truly their image of an aspirational future, the embodiment of what they philosophically hope to achieve, then why would go about it in this way? Buying such cheaply-made pastiche of Minimalism will not take us very far toward a sustainable, just future. This is precisely the performativity of the good life—the fantasy that perpetuates the prevailing systems. Cultural hegemony has shifted toward promoting ideal, pacifying home environments, but there has been little in the way of challenging why respite is needed at all. It is not surprising that Americans would indulge in this fantasy of ideal living and modernity; Americans are used to being peddled anti-aging miracles, restorative vacations, and life-changing diets. This especially because of the overall decline of American prosperity and strength in recent decades that has put American hegemony into question. Take for instance the US’ slump in productivity, increasing competition from rising economic powers, globalization’s intractability, Vietnam, Iraq, now climate change and Coronavirus, etc. 28 3.3 Lifestyle Minimalists Lifestyle Minimalists take a step further into the delusion. For instance, “The Minimalists,” makers of the widely-watched documentary Minimalism: A Documentary About the Important Things in Life, tout that, Minimalism is a tool that can assist you in finding freedom. Freedom from fear. Freedom from worry. Freedom from overwhelm. Freedom from guilt. Freedom from depression. Freedom from the trappings of the consumer culture we’ve built our lives around. Real freedom.62 But are they really free? Where Minimalism as a movement has ended up is something more akin to a political consumerism than revelatory emancipation—or even subversion. Although political consumerism has been shown by scholars to have some potential to effect change,63 in practice it is often (sometimes willfully) mistaken for the only political work one needs to do—buy the recycled paper, the organic produce, the fair-trade coffee, the Minimalist-style furniture. In reality, it should only play a part in challenging hegemonic structures. A political consumerism is still consumerism. 62. Millburn, Joshua Fields, and Ryan Nicodemus. “What Is Minimalism?” The Minimalists (blog). Accessed April 6, 2020. https://www.theminimalists.com/minimalism/. 63. Stolle, Dietlind, and Michele Micheletti. Political Consumerism: Global Responsibility in Action. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013. 29 Figure 4: Screenshots from YouTube home tours by Lifestyle Minimalists. Not only this, but they follow the same aesthetic style as non-Lifestyle Minimalists. They have not created a distinct aesthetic language for their movement that would set them apart, and which might more closely resemble a productive political consumerism. Figure 5: Screenshots from YouTube influencers’ Minimalist home tours. 30 Notice the shared color palette; the exposed wood; the plants; the simple furniture; and even the gestures toward a less creolized, Japanese Minimalism (see with wooden slatted cabinet in top left of Figure 4). One might contend that this could actually represent a repoliticization of the aesthetic, as an important aspect of the emancipatory potential of aesthetics is that it can not only provide critical distance, but can also provide images of another possible way of life. However, this is citizen as chooser—not actor64 or individual. They undermine their ostensible project by using this aesthetic, by buying these aesthetic goods. To subvert or escape the dyad would require an aesthetic language of their own. This is the political aesthetics that Benjamin described, which will be explored further in the next section. To conclude this section, I would like to return to one of the tenets of a praxis of Critical Theory: “[i]n a dominative society, contradictions cause problems and are to a certain extent also the seeds for overcoming these problems. They have positive potentials and negative realities at the same time.”65 Though there are these negative realities, what might be the positive potentials of Minimalism. 64. Appadurai, Arjun. “Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy.” In Globalization: The Greatest Hits, a Global Studies Reader, edited by Manfred B. Steger, 33–47. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers, 2010, 44. 65. Fuchs, 11 (emphasis added). 31 4. Political Aesthetics, and Other Possibilities 4.1 Minimalism as Political Aesthetics According to Benjamin, political aesthetics is the remedy to aesthetic politics. To reiterate, ‘[a]estheticizing politics’ turns visual representation into something a-temporal and utopian; ‘politicizing art’ on the contrary, involves returning the image to the temporal and spatial specificities of its origin, with a vengeance. Thus is made possible an art that can hold politics to account rather than simply exult in it.66 Political art invites us to ask questions about our everyday realities. It does so by contextualizing the mundane, making connections we otherwise might not between various social phenomena, and generally by providing critical distance from the everyday. Surrealist art (1917-), an outwardly revolutionary movement, tried to run with this philosophy; Surrealism provokes thought by juxtaposing unexpected objects or otherwise making seemingly absurd statements. It seeks to unlock sub-/unconscious dreams, ideas, and images, and is deeply influenced by Marxist thought. Surrealists hope that such art holds to key to the psyche and could lead to emancipatory revelations and thus revolution. However, this makes for impractical, exclusive political praxis. The conventional dichotomy of intellectuals vs. ignorant masses that many at the Frankfurt School held— again, they largely believed that “the true realities underlying power structures, social, cultural, or economic ones that governed society but were invisible to all but the most erudite of intellectuals and intellectually engaged artists”67—is reductive and leads to 66. Manderson, 2. 67. Gage, 4-5. 32 such lofty suggestions for praxis. People are more than homogenous, insentient masses to be wielded this way or that, to be liberated by the powerful intellectual. Additionally, such intellectually-engaged artists have been unable to substantively or materially alter the artpolitical environment. I am interested in proffering the everyday person more purchase as a political agent, with room for them to do so in their own manner that does not rest on the power of high arts and other supercilious ideas. Again, theory means little if it is not translatable to praxis. 4.2 Minimalism: A Cruel Optimism Let us return to one of political aesthetics’ central concerns: what might now be termed affective or semiotic value. Minimalism is closely associated with—and celebrated for— its qualities of utopia, futuristicness, and sanctuary. Analyzing films and other cultural phenomena, Lauren Berlant developed the concept of ‘cruel optimism’ to conceptualize why subjects might be drawn to certain objects, ways of being, and ideas that may appear contradictory to an outside observer. The contradiction here would be, first, that consumption of Minimalist-style consumer goods is unsustainable, and second, that the use of the style is merely a choice from within the artpolitical environment, not the result of individual political agency. She explains, A relation of cruel optimism exists when something you desire is actually the obstacle to your flourishing. It might involve food, or a kind of love, it might be a fantasy of the good life, or a political project. It might rest on something simpler, too, like a new habit that promises to induce in you an improved way of being. These kinds of optimistic attachment are not inherently cruel. They become cruel only when the object that draws your attachment actively impedes the aim that brought you to it initially.68 68. Berlant, 1 (emphasis added). 33 This aim is usually something akin to happiness, fulfillment, etc. In essence, when one aspires to achieve the unachievable—that fantasy of the good life—they struggle more than they might if they tried to define their own good life. For example, let us again return to the hegemonic family structure. The efforts to legalize gay marriage could be interpreted as a relation of cruel optimism. Striving for non-traditional relationships to be accepted into this institution rather than interrogating the institution’s underlying assumptions (which are inherently patriarchal and heteronormative and were not made to suit alternative relationships) makes the effort cruelly optimistic. I assert that Minimalism also entails a relation of cruel optimism; it carries the affective promise of happiness and thriving. Because Minimalism is associated with a futuristic, utopic good life, people strive to achieve it by any means—even if that means buying products that make such a future unlikely. This leads to performance of the good life instead of its manifestation— the visual effect of emancipation. It actually occludes a/the good life’s realization in the process. However, this is not necessarily a damning prognosis. Critical Theorists might have deemed this false consciousness or something similarly unsympathetic. While it is true that “one of optimism’s ordinary pleasures is to induce conventionality, that place where appetites find a shape in the predictable comforts of good-life genres that a person or a world has seen fit to formulate,” in other words that subjects tend to follow the goodlife blueprints lain out in the ideological environment, Berlant also asserts that, “optimism doesn’t just manifest an aim to become stupid or simple—often the risk of attachment taken in its throes manifests an intelligence beyond rational calculation.”69 69. Berlant, 2. 34 The intelligence Berlant writes of is finding ways to survive without the unrelenting pressure to thrive that a less forgiving praxis might enforce. What might appear to an outsider as performativity could also be recategorized as identification with an image of a good life, expression of an unfilled need, or something else that entails moving away from the life one is prescribed. I am particularly interested in Berlant’s idea of ‘lateral agency’—a sort of “selfabeyance, or floating sideways;”70 a certain spreading out but not moving forward. Berlant describes “the scene of slow-death, a condition of being worn out by the activity of reproducing life”71 that subjects undergo in the dominative and exploitative structure of capitalism. In this condition, when the deck is stacked against you, it is understandably difficult to resist and to live up to the lofty expectations laid out in theory. Instead of perfect praxis or linear progress, she explains that “agency can be an activity of maintenance, not making; fantasy, without grandiosity; sentience without full intentionality; inconsistency, without shattering; and embodying, alongside embodiment;”72 agency can be lateral when one’s movement or thinking (up or out) is restricted. Berlant is more interested in a certain reformulation of agency than in sovereignty, the conventional measure of one’s power over their life. Minimalism offers such lateral agency. The fact that Minimalism adds pleasure and respite to people’s lives makes it politically productive. It is productive not only in terms of promoting survival and resilience in a challenging environment, but leisure itself is a means of resisting capitalism’s constraints. Time spent enjoying oneself in the privacy of the home is time 70. Berlant, 116. 71. Berlant, 100. 72. Ibid. 35 when they are not aiding capital. Although leisure now is deeply tied to consumerism, scholars are coming to appreciate a “phenomenology of enjoyment”73 that could resemble something like agency. There is a tension here that I am comfortable with—for now. Again, contradictions are the seeds for overcoming problems. Indeed, in order for us to resist the dyad, it is necessary to be more subjective, more forgiving than aesthetic politics can allow. We must also allow for more subjectivities than those of intellectuals or artists. In a chapter on obesity Berlant explains that “[t]he structural position of the overwhelmed life intensifies this foreshortening of consciousness and fantasy. Under a regime of crisis ordinariness, life feels truncated, more like desperate doggy paddling than like a magnificent swim out to the horizon. Eating adds up to something, many things: maybe the good life, but usually a sense of well-being that spreads out for a moment, not a projection toward a future. Paradoxically, of course, at least during this phase of capital, there is less of a future when one eats without an orientation toward it.”74 Minimalism helps sustain people in this moment. It is an imperfect treatment for the vast and complex problem that is the dyad of consumerism and civic disengagement. Lateral agency creates some space for movement unlike the theoretical straightjacket of a rigid aesthetic politics. Yet I do not wish to abandon aesthetic politics. For all its constraints, it lays the groundwork for how cultural outlets such as architecture can serve as an alternative medium for political ideation apart from—or at least, alongside—the conventional ones: texts, constitutions, speeches, etc. I find this to be an incredibly useful concept; architecture embodies a way of living in some ways better than any writing can. But as Berlant reminds us, we must also orient Minimalism—this world-building— 73. Napier, 10. 74. Berlant, 117 (emphasis added). 36 toward the future. Minimalism can offer not only respite, but can also be a staging ground for action. How might these seeds sprout? 4.3 Minimalism: A Staging Ground for Action “Is not their civilization rather higher than ours?”75 - Christopher Dresser Fantasy, for all its cruel optimism, is not a dead end. Fantasy can “distort the present on behalf of what the present can become.”76 In order to conceptualize fantasy’s potential, it is productive to reframe fantasy as something a bit more useful: imagination. Changing the discourse around utopian thinking is useful because it is so often disregarded by ‘political realists’ as not only being impossible, but also a distraction from the real political work that needs to be done. Indeed, “the idea of fantasy carries with it the inescapable connotation of thought divorced from projects and actions, and it also has a private, even individualistic sound about it.”77 However, imagination, on the other hand, has a projective sense about it, the sense of being a prelude to some sort of expression, whether aesthetic or otherwise. Fantasy can dissipate (because its logic is so often autotelic), but the imagination, especially when collective, can become the fuel for action. It is the imagination, in its collective forms, that creates ideas of neighborhood and nationhood, of moral economies and unjust rule, of higher wages and foreign labor prospects. The imagination is today a staging ground for action, and not only for escape.78 Fantasy—or, less grandiosely, imagination—nourishes what some scholars call a ‘collective subversive imagination.’79 Minimalism is a certain collective dressing up or 75. Hoganson, Kristin L. “Cosmopolitan Domesticity, Imperial Accessories: Importing the American Dream.” In Consumers’ Imperium The Global Production of American Domesticity, 1865-1920, 13–56. Chapel Hill [N.C.]: Chapel Hill N.C. : University of North Carolina Press, 2007. 76. Berlant, 263. 77. Appadurai, Arjun. “Here and Now.” In The Visual Culture Reader, edited by Nicholas Mirzoeff, 2. ed, repr., 173–79. London: Routledge, 2010, 177. 78. Ibid. (emphasis added). 79. Kumm and Johnson. 37 trying on of a new way of life, and creating Minimalist spaces is itself a step forward from merely imagining them. More subversive ideas are already sprouting. Take, for example, the growing Tiny House Movement. These homes are 100-400 square feet, whereas the average American home is 2,600 square feet. Followers downsize—rather than merely aestheticize—their lives.80 Taking a step back, it comes as no surprise that Minimalism would be used for such fantastical purposes; it is situated within a long history of Western Orientalist fantasies about the East, of appropriating aesthetic objects while leaving the ideology behind. Orientalism of Japan has been unique. Although Japan’s cultural differences are certainly imagined, emphasized, exaggerated and distorted81 by the ‘Occident’ as with other cultures in the ‘Orient,’ Japan is often painted in a more favorable light. Japan is seen as being more ‘civilized’ than its fellow Eastern Others, and even worthy of comparison to Western nations. Occupying a unique place “in the Western imagination, Japan has existed as an object of respect, fear, derision, admiration, and yearning, sometimes all at once.”82 Indeed, when we look at the full range of Western views of Japanese culture starting in the nineteenth century, what is most striking is a relative lack of racism or belittlement, still less the ‘hostility and aggression’ that [Edward] Said claimed to find invariably when one culture (mis)represents another. Sometimes the praise for Japan, especially its aesthetics, verges on fulsome.83 80. The Tiny Life. “What Is The Tiny House Movement? Why Tiny Houses?” Accessed April 23, 2020. https://thetinylife.com/what-is-the-tiny-house-movement/. 81. “What Is Orientalism? | Reclaiming Identity: Dismantling Arab Stereotypes.” Accessed April 21, 2020. http://arabstereotypes.org/why-stereotypes/what-orientalism. 82. Napier, 2. 83. Napier, 9. 38 For example, nineteenth-century British artist and critic Christopher Dresser asked, “Who shall say that the Japanese are imperfectly civilized when they thus pay homage to learning and skill and prefer these to wealth? Is not their civilization rather higher than ours?”84 The global migration of aesthetic ideas and the creation of fantasies has already helped spur new ideation of what civilization could look like, new widening of Western consciousness about itself and Others. In this globalized/globalizing world, ideologies spread, collide, combine—resulting in new formulations and possibilities. Now for a final meditation. 84. Ibid. 39 5. Conclusion “Fantasy is the mise-en-scène of desire”85 - Jean Laplanche and J.B. Pontalis Susan Napier, a scholar on Orientalist fantasies about Japan, wrote about the above psychoanalytic definition of fantasy: “‘Fantasy is the mise-en-scène of desire.’ Mise-en-scène is a term used in theater and cinema indicating the setting and props of a performance; its use in this case suggests the constructed quality of fantasy.”86 Im interested in this theatrical, constructed understanding of fantasy. “Performance” and “props” are apt metaphors because people are literally setting scenes in which to act out their impression of what life is or should be. They are curating their own private lives. Place this here, not there. This, not that. Minimalism is certainly performative, but so is all architecture, interior design, fashion, and other aspects of social relations that constitute our culture. Minimalism is neither completely unconscious performance of ideology nor completely conscious political action, but something in between. A certain coming-tolucidity is at play here. Minimalist could be the beginnings of an articulation of a desire for emancipation that could ultimately lead to its realization. The irreal, or as-yet unrealized possibilities can be worked through via this medium. The home provides a visual medium—a tabula rasa87—onto which we can inscribe new ways of living, meaning, dreams, aspirations, and fears. 85. Napier, 3. 86. Ibid. 87. Napier, 11. 40 Indulging in fantasy/imagination is not passive escape, but a “highly active pursuit, seeking out or even creating new worlds and new identities.”88 Like ideology, fantasy is an act, a process, a development of subjectivities. It is moldable and realizable just as ideology is. Minimalism is part of an ontological process of becoming, not an end in and of itself. It is something to work with, not just toward. It is not merely political aesthetics nor aesthetic politics. Instead, let us recategorize Minimalism as not only a resting place, but also a generative space amidst complex, difficult-to-articulate and endure political realities and complicated fantasies. For as Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi writes, [w]e have all experienced times when, instead of being buffeted by anonymous forces, we do feel in control of our actions, masters of our fate. On the rare occasion that it happens, we feel a sense of exhilaration, a deep sense of enjoyment that is long cherished and that becomes a landmark in memory for what life should be like. […] It is what the painter feels when the colors on the canvas begin to set up a magnetic tension with each other, and a new thing, a living form, takes shape in front of the astonished creator.89 88. Napier, 3. 89. Napier, 10. 41 Works Cited Ahmed, Sarah. “Happy Objects.” In The Affect Theory Reader, edited by Melissa Gregg and Gregory J Seigworth. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2010. Appadurai, Arjun. “Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy.” In Globalization: The Greatest Hits, a Global Studies Reader, edited by Manfred B. Steger, 33–47. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers, 2010. ———. “Here and Now.” In The Visual Culture Reader, edited by Nicholas Mirzoeff, 2. ed, repr., 173–79. London: Routledge, 2010. Architectural Digest Instagram Post, (@archdigest), February 3, 2020. Arendt, Hannah. The Origins of Totalitarianism. Boston, Mass.: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2011. Barker, Chris. Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. 4th Edition. Los Angeles /; London: SAGE, 2012. Benjamin, Walter. “Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction: War and Fascism.” In Social Theory: The Multicultural, Global, and Classic Readings, edited by Charles Lemert, 6th ed., 219–26. Westview Press, 2017. Berlant, Lauren Gail. Cruel Optimism. Durham: Duke University Press, 2011. Chen, Joyce. “Kanye West Explains the ‘Wabi-Sabi’ Aesthetic of His Minimalistic Hidden Hills Home.” Architectural Digest, June 7, 2019. ———. “Kim Kardashian Calls Her Hidden Hills Home a ‘Minimal Monastery’ | Architectural Digest.” Architectural Digest, April 11, 2019. Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly, and Eugene Rochberg-Halton. The Meaning of Things: Domestic Symbols and the Self. Cambridge [Eng.] ; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Fuchs, Christian. Critical Theory of Communication: New Readings of Lukács, Adorno, Marcuse, Honneth and Habermas in the Age of the Internet. First published 2016. Critical Digital and Social Media Studies. London: University of Westminster Press, 42 Gage, Mark Foster, ed. Aesthetics Equals Politics: New Discourses across Art, Architecture, and Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2019. Geuss, Raymond. The Idea of a Critical Theory: Habermas and the Frankfurt School. Cambridge: Cambridge, 1981. Gregg, Melissa, and Gregory J Seigworth. The Affect Theory Reader. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2010. Hebdige, Dick. Subculture: The Meaning of Style (New Accent Series). Routledge, 1979. Hoganson, Kristin L. “Cosmopolitan Domesticity, Imperial Accessories: Importing the American Dream.” In Consumers’ Imperium The Global Production of American Domesticity, 1865-1920, 13–56. Chapel Hill [N.C.]: Chapel Hill N.C. :/ University of North Carolina Press, 2007. KonMari | The Official Website of Marie Kondo. “Konmari.” Accessed April 8, 2020. Kumm, Brian, and Corey Johnson. “Subversive Imagination: Smoothing Space for Leisure, Identity, and Politics.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Leisure Theory, 891– 910, 2017. Manderson, Desmond. “Here and Now: From ‘Aestheticizing Politics’ to ‘Politicizing Art,’” 2016. Marx, Karl, Loyd David Easton, and Kurt H. Guddat. Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society. Indianapolis, Ind: Hackett Pub. Co, 1997. Millburn, Joshua Fields, and Ryan Nicodemus. “What Is Minimalism?” The Minimalists (blog). Accessed April 6, 2020. Napier, Susan Jolliffe. From Impressionism to Anime: Japan as Fantasy and Fan Cult in the Mind of the West. 1st ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. Ostwald, Michael J, and Josephine Vaughan. The Fractal Dimension of Architecture, 2016. Poulantzas, Nicos. Political Power and Social Classes. 2d impression. London: Verso, 1982. Ruby, Ilka, Andreas Ruby, Angeli Sachs, and Philip Ursprung. Minimal Architecture. Architecture in Focus. Munich ; New York: Prestel, 2003. 43 Rus, Mayer. “Step Inside Kim Kardashian West and Kanye West’s Boundary-Defying Home | Architectural Digest.” Architectural Digest, February 3, 2020. Saito, Yuriko. “The Moral Dimension of Japanese Aesthetics.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 65, no. 1 (2007): 85–97. Sartwell, Crispin. Political Aesthetics. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 2010. Sassatelli, Roberta. Consumer Culture: History, Theory and Politics. 1st ed. Los Angeles:SAGE Publications, 2007. Schor, Juliet. The Overspent American: Upscaling, Downshifting, and the New Consumer. 1st ed. New York, NY: Basic Books, 1998. Stewart, Jessica. “What Is Minimalism? A Look at Minimalist Art, Architecture, and Design.” My Modern Met, October 28, 2018. Stolle, Dietlind, and Michele Micheletti. Political Consumerism: Global Responsibility in Action. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013. “What Is Orientalism? | Reclaiming Identity: Dismantling Arab Stereotypes.” Accessed April 21, 2020. Wolin, Sheldon S. Democracy Incorporated: Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press, 2008. The Tiny Life. “What Is The Tiny House Movement? Why Tiny Houses?” Accessed April 23, 2020. 44 Images 45