Abstract.

This thesis seeks to investigate and analyse the theoretical and methodological problems associated with the sociology of consumption. In particular, there is a lack of clarity surrounding the ‘meaning’ of goods. A multiplicity of approaches have been used to assess this topic from disciplines such as, archaeology, social anthropology, economics, social history and more recently sociology. Whilst approaches have obviously varied between disciplines in accordance with their ‘concerns’ such as, producing a catalogue of objects of a past age, sociology itself has experienced diversities and ambiguities. Consumption for sociology has been approached from various theoretical positions, adopting different methodologies, touching upon wide-ranging topics. This article operates within a Material Culture framework, investigating one particular area of consumption: the meanings behind the consumption and display of household goods. This covers the importance of material culture: the relationship between people and objects. It explores how gender and age affect how we think about our homes. Throughout their lives, couples occupy a number of homes and the responses given here relate to which home they are currently occupying. This inquiry demonstrates how best to understand the ways in which individuals relate to their homes and possessions, revealing that there is a multiplicity of meanings about what the home ‘means’ to people.

Introduction and Background.
 
The term ‘consumer society’ is a complex one, but a general definition may be established for the purpose of this debate. A modern consumer society can be recognised by the motives that lay behind purchasing procedures. In contrast with traditional societies, modern consumerism is associated with status identity. What are important are the symbolic meanings and values that goods hold for consumers (Brewer and Porter 1993). To purchase a product partly involves the consumption of images, including the consumption of lifestyle images, rather than the purchase of basic needs. Emphasis is placed not on what is bought, but the meanings associated with the purchased goods. What people buy and own is believed to convey an impression about what sort of people they are and to reflect their lifestyle. Consumption patterns have become indicative of status, in a similar way as job titles (McCracken 1988).
 
Motives behind purchasing have undergone enormous changes, by becoming a route through which to gain pleasure, satisfaction, status and prestige (McCracken 1988). Pleasure can be derived from the dreams attached to goods, rather than the commodity itself. People have become narcissistic; continually striving for more and the desire for further satisfaction (McKendrick et al 1982). This process has filtered through society, but to what degree and at what period in history depends upon the perspective one associates with.
 
The non-durability of goods has increased, they are now bought to fulfill a specific purpose for a limited time. Goods are often replaced before they are worn out or broken, because people decide to buy the new, updated model. The shift in emphasis has been from the utility of specific goods to their symbolic meanings (McCracken 1988). The factor of increased leisure time has been used to argue that more people spend time shopping as a result of reduced working hours (Hibbert 1987:599). It may be correct to state that more people spend time shopping but too deterministic to state that shopping time has increased. Williams (1982) pinpoints the introduction of credit as a vital feature of modern consumption, along with the rise of the department store, which glamorised purchasing through the display of goods in a more aesthetically appealing manner. This contributes to the belief in increased availability of goods and new levels of browsing. Mukerji (1983) in contrast, does not regard the rise of the department store as a crucial feature marking the transition from pre - to modern - society, but all theorists accept it as a distinctive component of modern consumer societies.
 
The majority of commentators point to the importance of advertising in stabilising (and also increasing) consumption levels. Consumption has moved beyond describing a products’ utility; goods are now imbued with symbolic meaning. Television advertisements and billboards often limit the visual display of the product they are selling with the result that the nature of adverts has become more abstract and associative. Cultural principles find expression in every aspect of social life, especially goods, enabling them to become both the creators and creations of the culturally constant world. It is through advertising that consumer goods and the culturally constant world are brought together. A combination of the above factors constitutes contemporary consumer society, but each element is important to varying degrees.
 
For example, Bourdieu's (1984) work explains how goods not only mark social differences, but act as communicators. This relates back to work within social anthropology, where writers such as Douglas and Isherwood (1980) first investigated social groups. They found that whilst exchange is an important part of consumption, consumption involves communication. They criticised traditional economic and historical writings for their limited definitions of goods as merely fulfilling a subsistence need. Ultimately material possessions carry social meanings (Douglas and Isherwood 1979:59). Bourdieu (1984) and Veblen (1925) share one common assumption: taste is a key factor affecting the significance of everyday goods (Miller 1987:147).
 
Bourdieu’s line of argument claims that the constant supply of new, desirable goods is an important form of knowledge, displaying social and cultural values. He highlights the new middle classes as a particularly important group of consumers who demonstrate the importance of self-improvement through the appropriation of goods. Bourdieu’s Distinction (1984) was the result of extensive empirical research in France. His work breaks with the traditional line of structuralism, claiming that social action cannot be reduced to a set of external structures. People are not just acting under rules, but on the other hand they are not completely free individuals.1

For Bourdieu, social action is located between the two stances; the individual being neither controlled by external forces, nor completely conscious of the full understanding of social meaning (Lee 1993:31).

Advertising plays a part in determining a symbolic meaning. Whilst publicly held meanings are significant determinants of meaning, they are not always conclusive. Goods are markers, but their rapid circulation could suggest a threat of disorder, in terms of clouding the readability of goods as signs of social status. Bourdieu however, denies this is the case, as although goods and styles are copied, it is how one displays the good that makes it an important marker and indication of status and identity. Those in the top social groups veer towards high culture and those at the bottom are concerned with popular culture, whereas those in the middle ‘aspire to legitimate culture, but lack cultural capital’ (Smee 1997:325).
 
According to Featherstone (1991), social class distinctions are less formal and rigid. Three new middle-class fractions2 have developed and issues of gender, age, ethnic background and other cultural differentiation’s have increased in importance. Classes are not disappearing as such, but more fractions are developing within them, with their own dispositions.
 
What Bourdieu’s work has shown though, is that group membership does not precede identity or vice versa, but rather that they exist simultaneously, but in potentially different relationships. Thus, one cannot simply declare what it is to be middle-class, young or old as each is inter-linked with an individual’s relation to self-identity. In sum, ‘consumer culture provides an important context for the development of novel relationships of individual self-assembly and group membership’ (Lury 1996:256).
 
Social Psychology
 
The most comprehensive study of the meaning of household goods was conducted by Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberd-Halton (1981). This study was a quantitative investigation into three-generation families in Chicago. This study is important for highlighting the close relationship between personality and property (Formaneck 1994:329). They discovered that objects incorporate the values and tastes of people and embody their accomplishments in life. Objects represent links with others, such as family members and ties with past ages and symbolise common links between partners by representing their lives together. Objects help fulfil our sense of self, as they symbolise our personalities, status and lifestyle, marking links with the past, present and future (Csikszentmihalyi 1981). Goods have qualities beyond their functional use, ‘the things around us are inseparable from who we are. Thus material objects we use are not just tools we can pick up and discard at our convenience; they constitute the framework of experience that gives order to otherwise shapeless selves’ (Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton 1981:16).
 
Dittmar (1992) too, argues that goods are laden with cultural meanings and images and possess extensive symbolic significance for their owners and others. The acquisition of goods expresses identity (Dittmar 1992:4). Material possessions therefore constitute a language through which people communicate with one another. Goods reflect personal taste, and mark differences between social groups, private and public space, male and female space (Dittmar 1992:6). Material possessions are symbols of identity in personal and group terms. Goods symbolise, ‘the personal qualities of individuals, [and] also the groups they belong to and their social standing generally’ (Dittmar 1992:10-11). In the modern world, ‘who we are has been defined more and more through what we have as individuals: material possessions have become symbols of personal and social identity’ (Dittmar 1992:13). Dittmar explains that the important issue is the nature of this link and how individuals understand this connection. Socially shared representations are not static as reality is context dependent. Meanings are acquired through socialisation, in the form of education, the family and the media, but meanings are constantly being reproduced and transformed. The messages that material symbols convey ‘are less overt and interpretation may not be conscious and deliberate. They ... may have different meaning for different social or cultural groups, ...[and] material symbols ... reinforce status, wealth and power differentials. Material symbols allow for the representation of social categories ...’ (Dittmar 1992:82-3). People do not passively accept representations, but are socialised into understanding the meanings between material possessions and identity. Thus, material possessions come to ‘symbolically reflect self and others’ (Dittmar 1992:88).
  
Methods.
 
By using a number of data collection methods, the research project was given greater scope and depth without incurring the need to resort to more costly and time consuming methods (cf. Howard and Sharp 1983; Moore 1987).
 
Interviews
 
The particular form of interview ideal for this project was the semi-structured interview. Whilst they are respondent-friendly, the reduced formality of semi-structured interviews can allow the respondent to diverge from the relevant issues. This however, was kept to a minimum. The respondents did go off on tangents, but they were not prompted to continue along these lines.
 
The relatively small sample of this inquiry and the use of semi-structured interviews made it problematic to generalise from the findings. This does not however, render the inquiry futile. General themes can be drawn from the data and the information serves as a case study for further research.
 
For the research study here, the sample focused on middle-income groups, who were homeowners, with no (dependent) children. Whilst this may seem limiting in terms of reflecting only one segment of the population, it allowed general themes specific to this social group to be identified.
 
Gaining access to middle-class couples with no dependent children was a hurdle. To combat this, the snowballing sampling technique was used. This sampling technique is particularly useful when the population is difficult to find, as it introduces other potential respondents to the project, through the recommendation of the respondents already interviewed.
 
Snowballing does give a non-random sample, but bias was reduced by ‘breaking the chain of contacts at the various points and restarting the snowball of informants’ (O’Connell Davidson and Layder 1994:177). The sampling chain was broken three times to reduce the possibility of such bias.
 
Altogether twelve couples were interviewed. The interviews were conducted in the respondents’ homes; men and women being interviewed separately. This enabled issues relating to gender to emerge. Interviewees fell into particular age range categories: 20 to 30 year olds, 30 to 40 year olds, 40 to 55 year olds and 55 to 70 year olds. Each couple comprised of individuals who fell within the same age range. From this focus, age related responses became apparent. Three couples were chosen from each age range and for all three of the 20 to 30 year olds, each were occupying their first bought home. The 30 to 40 year olds were all on their third of fourth home. Those in the 40 to 55 age group felt that another move would be made, as did the 55 to 70 age group, except one couple who inhabited the house intended for their retirement (Graph 1).

Graph 1 The number of homes owned in relation to age

No. of homes owned
Last
5
4
3
2
1
Age range	20-30	30-40	40-55	55-70
Note: Last refers to 6-9 homes owned denotes a home owned by each couple

All the interviewees had no children living with them. This was one of the criteria of the sample, because I wanted to gain information about what the home meant to them as individuals and as a couple. Children would have meant that time and money would have been redirected towards different goals and desires, reflecting the needs and demands of the children.
 
Before the interview I telephoned each respondent to establish a convenient time for the interview. I explained that it was important to conduct it within their own homes, to gain detailed information. It was calculated that only one interview would be carried out per day, to allow for travelling to their homes, recording observations, taking photographs, and conducting the interviews.
 
Each interview took between 25 and 30 minutes and was taped. I assured them that only I would listen to the tapes, and they would all be transcribed by me. On arrival I gave each interviewee the opportunity to describe where in the home they wanted to be interviewed, enabling them to feel more at ease for answering the questions. I was then taken on a guided tour of the homes and asked if I could take photographs to illustrate some of their responses. All were willing to oblige. I conducted 24 interviews overall, which proved very time consuming. However, the data gathered was rich and detailed.
 
Prior to these interviews, e-mail interviews were conducted with the magazine editors. Magazines undoubtedly, play an important role in creating and sustaining product images and meaning. These email interviews were used to gain a perception of the issues that may be important to this inquiry. In this respect, they were useful for generating theory and formulating relevant topics for discussion with home-owners. The questions were aimed at extrapolating general information about their readers and the aspirations of the magazines. I obtained the sampling frame from a list of every interior magazine published in the UK. I took every third name from the magazines that were published monthly. I felt that conducting e-mail interviews would prove a novel way of conducting an interview, and would perhaps elicit a greater response than by post. Although the number who actually replied did not constitute a large sample base, they provided me with enough information to draw general themes.
 
Visual analysis proved an important research tool for this project, photographic data helped to illustrate this relationship because this inquiry was concerned with objects (i.e. the visual), the meanings behind them and their acquisition. This research acted as an illustration of the objects people cherished, rooms they loved and the overall interior and exterior image of the home. In spite of this, photographic material has been absent from most sociological research3 (Fyfe and Law 1988:2). Photographs provided evidence of the ways that people related to their home environment, providing documentary evidence of a largely unresearched relationship between people and household objects. In this project, photographs were used as a supportive research tool, helping to assess and consequently validate my research findings.
 
Results.
 
From the twelve semi-structured interviews with couples, general themes became apparent. The most notable issue common to almost all of the interviews was the emphasis upon the aesthetics of goods. The act of purchasing commodities partly for their aesthetic qualities featured as a tremendously important part of peoples’ relationship with their home environment. This special relationship altered in accordance with age and gender. Where younger participants desired new and updated goods, older respondents found pleasure in a wider range of goods, enjoying both contemporary and past goods. The home was seen as a cherished part of peoples’ lives, personality and identity. It was not seen as a finished entity, but rather as a reflection of peoples’ developing sense of self and a marker of future aspirations.
 
Communication also surfaced as an important feature, in terms of goods communicating and signifying qualities to the couples themselves, rather than to others. Whilst the outward appearance of their homes was mentioned in terms of other peoples’ perceptions, the interviewees stated that purchases were not bought as status symbols. I had anticipated this response, but I felt this issue of status symbols may have been underplayed. However, the most important issue was the pleasure homes gave to the couple themselves. The younger respondents were concerned with the aesthetic appeal of their homes, but realised their goals may be some way off. Pleasure was therefore linked with their short and long-term aspirations.
 
Whilst general themes are identifiable, this does not suggest that all experienced the same relationship with objects. From the responses given, purchases were both a reflection of their social position, their personalities and lifestyles. This was particularly evident when men and women who were part of the same couple gave completely different answers to the same questions and focused on different objects and areas within the home. While the younger couples showed the most marked differences, they were still able to accurately guess the responses their spouses would give.
 
General Themes.
 
All except one of the 24 respondents thought that their home did reflect their personality. Whilst asked how it did so, most took a few moments to gather their thoughts, then gave a detailed response, drawing upon specific examples. Each person felt the home should reflect their lives and personalities and acknowledge changes within their lifetime. When asked whether and how the home reflected her personality, one replied,
 
[Laughs] ‘I hope it does. It reflects all our personalities. I think a home really wants to be a reflection of your life and the things you enjoy doing and the various part of your life and the present ... [there are] references to places we've been, houses we've lived in ... and pursuits.’
 
For those respondents who lived in out of the ordinary buildings (12th Century church, mill tower) the responses to this question were particularly detailed, their homes reflecting the more ambitious side of the personalities. They realised there homes had given them a life time opportunity and one which under other circumstances, if they had children for example would have been inappropriate. Others reflected their passion for beautiful things or their collections, feeling that either the inside or the outside (and possibly both) of their homes were a great part of their identity.
 
Nineteen of the respondents, rated their homes as the most important factor reflecting their lives and personalities, over and above their careers, cars and fashion. Four respondents that made up two of the couples rated their homes and careers as equally important and one rated the home second to their work. The following response sums up what people felt about the home,
 
‘I don't think there's anything more important than the home. That sounds awfully self satisfying doesn't it ... I see the home as one's sanctuary and it's very important because we love it ....’.
 
The car on the other hand was not rated highly, many claiming it just got them from ‘A to B’. Whilst recognising that the home was not always a peaceful place, on the whole people viewed the home as a haven, a place which one could decorate and organise to please oneself, and retreat into from the ‘outside world’. Whilst some felt their choice of building or colour of wall to be slightly misjudged, all spoke of a unique feeling, a special relationship they had with their home. One respondent summarises this point with the words,
 
‘Home is a sort of sanctuary isn't it ... I've always felt like that, even when I was at home with my parents [some 50 years ago]. I remember [she speaks here of a past house] I'd come back from work and I'd think, I'm back, I'm home ... I love going out, but I think I'll go and then I'll get back.’ [a saying adopted from her aunt].
 
A final theme that struck me was the intensity of feelings for the aesthetic quality of their homes. Whilst they knew that changes could make them feel happier, there was a special relationship that already existed between each individual and a specific object, or an area of the house or garden. One male respondent explained that their purchases were made in terms of the beauty of the object,
 
‘We buy things because we like the look of them. When we see something we both like, we buy it. It’s as simple as that.’
 
Their affiliation towards certain items did however, vary greatly according to age and gender. Yet all highlighted some sort of bond, an emotional tie with an aspect of the home. This however, is not to suggest that the home and its contents were irreplaceable. Many highlighted their ability to be able to replace stolen items or recreate a theme if a disaster occurred. So whilst their attachment to possessions was very great and they would feel a sense of personal loss, many felt their health was the most important asset in life. This was particularly reflected by the respondents over 45 years of age.
 
Most enjoyed their homes, referring to its beauty and spoke enthusiastically about it. Motives behind purchases were quite straight-forward. If they ‘needed’ an item for a functional purpose, its visual appearance was also an important factor. Those objects without a practical function were bought as part of a collection, for general interest or because they fitted in with the theme of a particular room. Both the utility of the good and its visual qualities were important. Ultimately though, specific items were bought for their visual beauty. When asked about the last item they had purchased for the home, one respondent referring to a plate displayed as an ornament replied,
 
‘When I like something I buy it ... and I like what I consider to be pretty furnishings and um, well, I just get great pleasure from buying things and seeing and living in what I think are nice surroundings.’
 
This response seemed to sum up the importance of the aestheticisation of consumption, how the display of the purchased good is an important aspect adding to the beauty of the object itself.
 
When asked to describe their homes all the respondents began with a physical description. This was interspersed to varying degrees with a visual description of specific items and rooms. All respondents began with the age and design of the house and a description of the number and types of rooms they had. Whilst this was somewhat expected, when asked to describe the feeling and atmosphere of the home, many were initially unsure how they felt. Overall the female respondents found this easier to answer. The home was either felt to be calm and restful, or inviting, in spite of the clutter or untidiness. These responses were important as they revealed that the home was more than a series of physical elements and that above all they hoped their personalities would shine through, making it a welcoming place to others. A male respondent said,
 
‘I think it’s a very welcoming and warm house, well that’s what we hope it is to our guests.’
 
Other responses raised important issues related to age and gender.
 
Information obtained from the interviews was supplemented by another form of data collection, namely observation. Guided tours around the homes were given by the respondents. This enabled me to gather additional information and clarify points that had already been given. The respondents pointed out objects and areas they had mentioned during the course of the interviews. This form of data collection was verifies the interview responses. The rest of this chapter will examine the themes that arose from the interviews in accordance with the categories of age and gender.
 
AGE

Couples aged between 20 and 30 years
 
Both gender and age was relevant to many of the responses. Whilst older couples between 55 and 70 years shared similarities in their answers, the young couples exhibited obvious differences, often giving conflicting responses.  An important factor is discernible in this. Spouses knew where their partner would differ and gave me accurate indications of what they would say. When asked if this house was their dream home, the ideal they had had in mind, a male respondent replied,
 
‘No, no, I would rather have lived in an older property, like one of the old cottages on the main street in the village. My wife, on the other hand was angling towards a new house to save on the amount of work and repairs. Yet, in the end, what with the problems with the surveyors, it has all been a bit of a nightmare. X [his wife] will probably say this is exactly what we were looking for, I know she will’.
 
His prediction was correct as his wife answered the question completely differently. This highlights their varied tastes and aspirations for how they view themselves and their desired lifestyle. His wife answered the same question with the words,
 
‘Yes, basically although we were looking for a two bedroom house, but we were shown this one which has three bedrooms. Apart from that though, this is the picture we had in mind. I bet X [her husband] has answered this question differently, as he wanted an older house.’
 
For the women in this age group, the colour scheme of the home seemed very important. Personal satisfaction with regards to their home was measured against this factor. This often reflected the fact they has spent a long time considering this and had ultimately had sole responsibility for the final decision. Their male partners were consulted, but it was always the female’s ultimate decision. This factor is important as it shows how happiness is equated with the beauty of the whole of the interior, rather than individual items. Females did not feel a sense of satisfaction, until the whole of a room had been ‘finished’. When asked what objects or areas of the home they particularly liked, the women of this age group always mentioned the walls of a room. This is summed up by one female respondent with the words,
 
‘The most special place is my bedroom, which has everything matching. I spent a lot of time choosing the right colours and design - it's a blue daisy print from ‘Next’.’
 
However, individual items did matter and if they were functional objects they still had to be aesthetically pleasing to the eye. They used terms such as ‘making do’ and ‘putting up with’ certain colour schemes, fixtures and objects until they had enough time and money to attend to them. They also seemed to know exactly what they were going to replace these things with and how they wanted their home to look. One female respondent explained that,
 
‘I like the house generally, as we painted it cream throughout, which makes it look more spacious. There are many objects I don’t like, like some old chairs in the sitting room, but I know what I’d like eventually. Until then, we thought it was important to make the walls look nice. This was relatively cheap, so it was the first thing that we did.’
 
Whilst both the men and the women knew that their homes would look better, given time and money and possibly a different property, the male respondents were less bothered if their present one looked a bit hectic and muddled. One man said,
 
‘It’s one step on from being a student house. It’s such a mishmash of furniture; it’s just not co-ordinated. It feels like it’s a little bit untidy ... It’s just home, just a roof over our heads at the moment. It hasn’t really got all the characteristics we want, things being planned and matched, but that will come in time. It’s comfortable.’
 
This response was typical of the men in this age group. Whilst recognising that it was not how they wanted it, they were content to live in it how it was for the foreseeable future. The men were more inclined to not care if the house went ‘unfinished’ as it was not their dream home. Their spouses on the other hand wanted to make the most of what they had even though they were likely to move. The home was ultimately chosen because of its simplicity, its functional attributes in terms of it needing little repair and being in a good position for the motor way to reach work. Even so, their female partners saw the home in a more visual and sentimental way. When the partner of the respondent above described the sitting room she said,
 
‘It’s definitely home for me as its got all my bits and pieces in it. The lounge is a bit seedy as its got videos everywhere. I reckon when people come and see it, people our age, they like it, because its a similar style to what they have, but I think maybe older people would find it quite sparse because of the way we’ve decorated it, it’s very plain, no fancy wallpaper or fancy borders.’ (Figure 1)
 
Figure 1 Photograph of the above respondents sitting room
 
Furthermore, this respondent had greater emotional investment in the home. This was typical of the women in the age group. When describing the atmosphere of the house she states that,
 
‘I have a sense of pride in it [pause] even though its X [her partner’s] name on the mortgage, it’s our first home together that isn’t rented, its our first time that we’ve been able to decorate and change things and so there’s a sense of pride. It’s slow but things are looking as though they’ve got either me or X or both of us imprinted on them. So it’s home.’
 
On the whole the female respondents saw the home as important reflections of their personalities and whilst they recognised it may take some time to get it how they wanted it, it was important to make the most of the available funds and live in relatively attractive surroundings, until they could afford more ‘stylish’ pieces.
 
Whilst the male spouses of these women showed a greater interest in the home than expected and had an affinity with the home, ultimately they saw it as a greater reflection of their partner's likes and tastes. The newly wed male saw the home as the female domain, in terms of creating a beautiful home environment. Whilst more than willing to give their opinions on what they did not like, the three men found choosing fabrics and colours very tedious. Whilst they had shown a greater initial interest, the choices were the female's final decision. They would comment on their preferences for different things that they were shown, but they did not actively seek out the choice of options. One respondent said that the purchases for the household were joint decisions, but on further investigation he admitted that,
 
‘I found the last lot of purchases so boring, so I let her [his wife] go out and come back with the samples and then I said to her, ‘I like that’.’
 
Whilst both the twenty to thirty year old males and females recognised that the home would eventually be a greater reflection of themselves, they still made choices based on visual qualities. Whilst disliking some parts of their homes and particular objects, they were very clear on how their home was going to look. Disliked objects usually belonging to the spouse, which had be ‘let in’ against the other ones’ wishes and were often put in a far corner of a room, out of the immediate gaze of visitors. This was not so much that they were trying to show things that would symbolise their status or achievements, but to hide the things one of other of them found to be particularly ‘ugly’. I regard this as an inverted form of conspicuous consumption, because they attempt to exclude objects that may not reflect their desired social status. One female respondent in this age group was the only person in the whole sample to admit buying goods for their culturally associated status. When asked whether she bought goods for their status symbol, one replied,
 
‘Nothing major, nothing really expensive, but there’s lots of things I’ve bought, nice things, purely because I know they’re going to look good on a table when people come round [pause], like the glasses and crockery. Just little things, that not only I’m impressed by, but I know other people are when they come round.’
 
Neither the men or the women were particularly interested in the garden or overly concerned with the exterior of the building, except one couple who had bought their home because it was a terraced house. This house was the couples’ second home and they seemed to have taken a more informed decision about its external features than the other two couples when they purchased it. This reflected the fact that they had previously lived in a modern semi-detached house for five years and wanted the challenge of tastefully bringing modern themes to a traditional property. Whilst the other two couples lived in modern houses all of them showed a preference for older properties, but possibly at a later stage in their lives.
 
All felt they had been influenced by magazines and what they had seen in their friends houses. When asked where they drew their ideas from, magazines and other peoples’ home were cited. A female respondent said,
 
‘I think that magazines have influenced us quite subconsciously really, because I don’t know where else I’ve got my ideas from. I’ve seen quite a few magazines, because my sister gets Homes and Gardens. I’ve seen a lot of things I like in there and this idea of cream throughout most of the house was definitely from somewhere ... I do like it, it’s not like I’ve just seen it and thought I’ll have that. [Pause] It could also be an influence from my mum and dad’s home though, as that’s cream’.
 
Her partner also recognised the impact of media images upon household choices, but felt that they had not actually acted upon them yet. He explained that whilst he had collected ideas form magazines and television programmes; he was keeping them in mind for the future. Perhaps this was an underestimation of the subconscious influence of the media on the choices he had already made. Whilst wanting stylish objects, all respondents wanted to put their own personality onto their homes, in terms of the stylisation of these fashionable goods. Whilst they cherished beautiful and contemporary items, they wanted to display them in a slightly unusual fashion.
 
For this age group, the most special item or household feature varied dramatically, within and between couples; most of the men stressed either practical objects (television and video or electric shower) and women objects of visual beauty. Whilst one male respondent said the television was the most special object, his partner said,
 
‘The most important thing is the bed [laughs] as it is an antique pine bed, the first thing we ever bought ... it is my favourite piece of furniture and about the only expensive thing we’ve got. I just know I’ll never go off it and it will follow me everywhere.’
 
The second female respondent mentioned a set of tables she had been given by her mother as a wedding gift, as they had great sentimental value. The male and female respondents of the third couple stressed an area of visual beauty, but an area which had required practical action from them. Both said the hallway, stairs and landing was the most important feature of the home. This was because they had decorated it themselves and fairly recently, having spent a lot of time choosing the right design. The wallpaper was chosen as it was,
 
‘Contemporary with the date of the house, it’s William Morris’ ‘Willow Bough’. It seemed an ideal choice for this sort of house. We liked the fluid nature of the design, and its scale was right for the space.’
 
There is a direct association with a wider concern; the date and style of the house (Victorian terrace). Its aesthetic beauty was intertwined with its marker as a ‘Victorian’ style pattern (Figure 2)
 
Figure 2 Wallpaper on the hall, stairs and landing.
 
This couple was very similar to those in the next age range, most probably because it was their second home. The homes of the younger couples had definite spaces that were finished, areas that were developing and ones that needed attention. These issues were very apparent, the couples viewing the home as a set of stages that needed ongoing attention. Conspicuous consumption did not surface as a widespread phenomenon, but they were obviously concerned with keeping the house very ordered, minimal and visually pleasing. However, the scarcity of their possessions may be a factor of their lack of economic funds, rather than an affinity with post-modern minimalist styles. They were far from being showy or ostentatious, but they had definite ideas about what they wanted to achieve and knew that these changes would give them immense satisfaction and positive feelings about themselves.
 
All these couples were more openly interested in the interior of the house. The gardens were either unattended or just a patch of grass. The inside was where they intended to focus their interest, most notably in the fabrics and colours they used. The heart of the home was either the bedroom or the sitting room, because it had been decorated by them and they felt it was one of the ‘finished’ parts.
 
Middle-aged Couples - 30 to 40 year olds
 
The outlook of the couples aged between thirty and forty-five was slightly different. They realised that since their twenties their dreams and tastes had changed and this was reflected in their purchases for the home, their decoration of it and the type of property they had bought. One couple had purposefully been looking to buy an older property, as they felt that,
 
‘they have much more character and charm. We wanted a terraced house and one we could do up ourselves. When we saw this house we knew it would be perfect. It hadn’t been modernised, the old fittings remaining from the 1960s ... Its exterior was ideal, as it looked pretty with the roses on it, and it hadn’t much garden, as we’re not into gardening really. The plain interior enabled us to put our own tastes into it. Its been gradual, and we’ve got a mixture of old and new styles, but we like it.’ (Figure 3)
 
Figure 3 Exterior of their home
 
This age range was more adventurous, using a mix of styles and objects, which were a combination of pieces they had collected and been given. They were not preoccupied with creating a common theme throughout, but tried to show that the home is a reflection of their many and varied interests. Whilst they wanted a nice house, most enjoyed it because of its clutter and contrasting ornaments. They were less idealistic in their outlook and although they still had definite goals and felt the home to be a vital reflection of themselves as individuals and as a couple, they realised home making was a long and gradual process. One male respondent summed up his feelings about what the home meant to him with the words,
 
‘I think the creation of the home is an ongoing process and a mixture of different styles and tastes. My home does reflect my personality as I buy the things I like, which is apparent with the type of things I buy and also in its design. Its visual appearance is important, I think, for my own appreciation of it.’
 
The home signifies a joint unit, something that they purchased together. This was particularly evident for the couple who were occupying their first bought home together. Rented houses had been restrictive and been relatively ‘untouched’. They felt this house gave them the opportunity to experiment with styles and be more creative, making more effort to create a nice environment. One couple had lived in a rented house together for two years before buying this current property. This purchase led them to have a greater interest in the appearance of the home and felt it represented their professional status and their personal identity and tastes. They stated that the most important feature of the home was,
 
‘The space and privacy it gives us. Rented accommodation was somewhat cramped and dreary and the most important objects to me are my books and ceramics.’ (Figure 4)
 
Figure 4 Picture of the sitting room and their possessions.
 
Both partners of this couple highlighted books as very special items. This reflected their interest in reading and their enjoyment of visiting second-hand book shops. This age range was very different from the others in terms of the items that were special to them. All highlighted books, or crockery, and other items of relative insignificance to the eye of an ‘outsider’. Their most treasured items were not showy, but very understated. Other age groups highlighted objects with associations with the past or very ornate pieces of furniture (Figure 5)
 
Figure 5 A picture of their treasured items (books)
 
Four respondents4 highlighted the equal importance of their careers as a reflection of their personality and status. One said,
 
‘My job is extremely important to me as it is a significant part of my life and I enjoy going to work, with the different challenges it gives me. The house is equally important, allowing us to develop our interests. The home though, is a reflection of both our personalities, where my career is important to me as an individual.’
 
This age range is less easy to group together as while two couples did not mention the possibly of having children, one couple had actively decided not to have them. I felt this fact was reflected in their answers, as their careers as well as their homes became a more important part of the lives. Although none of the 12 couples had children living at home at the time of the interviews, none of this age group had actually had children. The couple who were not going to have children actively stated this was a reason why they decided to purchase their home, as having children would have rendered the property impractical. They had bought the home for its aesthetic quality and unusual properties. The husband said that,
 
‘We didn't want to live in something ordinary. We liked it because it was different, but suitable for people like us as we don't have or intend to have children. It wouldn't be suitable for a family.’
 
This couple stressed the unique character of their home. This factor gave them immense pleasure and satisfaction. Whilst both did highlight the importance of their careers, their home an integral part of their identity and personality. Whilst they had not specifically looked for an unique property, it was an immediate decision once they had known it was available,
 
‘I had seen it before, but one Saturday afternoon we saw it in the estate agents window after it had closed. By Monday, we knew we wanted it, just from the description of it’
 
Although eager to personalise their home, they recognised it would be a gradual process. They were concerned to improve the garden, as the interior did not require immediate attention. The female respondent said,
 
‘We actually haven’t painted it, even though it hasn’t been done for about ten years, as it fits in well with the stone and timber work. It’s off white and it looks quite good. In another house you would mind ...’ (Figure 6)
 
Figure 6 The twelfth Century Church’s Interior.
 
From my observations those couples aged between 30 and 55 were the most creative respondents in terms of their homes. Whilst they were also concerned to stress the importance of their careers, from observing their homes it was apparent that the home constituted an important part of their lives. It was after all their sanctuary from outside pressures. Whilst some areas looked carefully planned, other looked like they had evolved. They were not ordered homes or totally messy, but they reflected the different concerns and interests of their owners. Many respondents felt the home to be a place where one could be oneself. This was evident from the cosy and relaxing atmosphere of their homes.
 
These two age ranges (30 to 40 and 40 to 55 years of age) seemed to show a greater interest in the exterior design of the house, and felt that this was part of what their homes meant to them. Their personalities were imbued in interior style of the homes, the type of building it was and the garden. How these respondents used space was a very important feature that I noticed, emphasis being placed of different areas for personal comfort, and specific rooms for more formal occasions. This made their homes very interesting to observe as some rooms looked in complete contrast with other ones. The heart of the home for the 30 to 40 year olds was either the study or the sitting room, but for the 40 to 55 year olds it was the living / kitchen area. Entertainment was one of their keen interests, which was reflected in the warmth of these rooms.
 
Couples aged between 40 and 55 years
 
Those couples in this age range recognised the home as an important extension of their lives.  To them it was a reflection of the past and present and a symbol for their future direction. They spoke of the memories imbedded within the home and with particular objects. One female respondent described her home in a unique way, seeing it more of a hobby. She explained that,
 
‘I think we’ve both had a lot of fun with the house and that’s we enjoy. We’ve had a lot of fun decorating it ... what we don’t have time to do is play with the house, move things around and so on. The house is basically a collection of our past pursuits and our present tastes and interests.’
 
Another couple mirrored this theme, their home giving them the opportunity to do the things they enjoy,
 
‘I love working in the garden and when we bought the property, there was no garden, just tarmac. I’ve spent a lot of time building a pond and planting shrubs and plants to get it exactly how I want it. It all takes time of course, but the garden is now beginning to flourish ... Inside needed a lot of work, but we have enjoyed taking it back to how it might have looked in Georgian times. We have obviously used modern materials and have contemporary possessions, but I think it’s a good representation, which mixes well with modern styles.’ (Figure 7)
 
Figure 7 Interior with mix of old and new styles in a Georgian property.
 
The home is more than just a physical structure, as it represents peoples’ social standing and tastes. It is a reflection of both their personalities and professional status. When another male respondent was asked whether he felt that the home reflected his personality, he replied,
 
‘Yes, I would have to say it does reflect our personalities, certainly in my judgement. I like to think that what I’m associated with is quality. Quality in my professional life and hopefully this comes through to quality in what we’ve done here.’
 
This respondent felt that the most special feature was the hall with the mill tower, because of its unusual qualities and professional workmanship. He said,
 
‘The hall is the most special area of the home to me ... it is unusual and the lighting that we’ve had installed sets off the mill tower very well.’ (Figure 8)
 
Figure 8 Hall with mill tower
 
The practical functions of the home were mentioned by two couples, both of which used the home as a place of business. A male respondent explained the importance of the home in terms of its housing his office space,
 
‘The rooms are all working for themselves. It is very much a working house ... we use four of the rooms for the business ... It therefore reflects the different areas of our lives and we have certain rooms for different occasions’.
 
The home therefore reflected both their public and private lives and incorporated their loves and also what they felt to be their purchasing mistakes.
 
All the respondents in this group had vast houses.  This however, was not the motive behind the purchase. Each bought the property because they cherished its beauty, not because of its' grand appearance. Two of the three couples tried to downplay its size, one respondent saying,
 
‘Our first house was a little terraced house and to be honest, I liked that very much indeed. I don't feel that I need a big house ... the main thing is just to be happy. It wasn't that we wanted a large house, we just happened to get one’.

The respondents felt the most important thing was that they themselves gained pleasure and enjoyment from their homes. Although all three couples in this age range were avid collectors of antiques, they said that they enjoyed the activity of collecting and the pleasure the objects gave them. Whilst none of them readily admitted to conspicuous consumption, their wealth and status was apparent to my eye. I do feel however, that this was a motivational factor in the purchase of their home, as their answers highlighted the fact that they loved beautiful things, and that their own lives and health were ultimately the most important things. One male said that if he had a fire in his home, he would,
 
‘Try and get X [his wife] out first and those living [pets] ... I can't think of anything in particular I would go for. I'd have to say that at the end of the day I'm insured.’
 
These respondents openly experienced great enjoyment from the visual beauty of their home, both its exterior and interior. However, the general impression was that they would be able to recreate this wonderful feeling in any house as they had imprinted their personalities and tastes into previous homes. More importantly, one respondent said that because his home was a splendid Georgian property he felt that although he put his and his wife’s personality and mark onto the building, but he would never see the house as ‘his’,
 
‘... I don't feel that I'm the owner of the house and really I think we're good for the house because we want to take it back to what is was. I look upon myself as more of a caretaker and all I'm doing is looking after it until someone else can enjoy it.’
 
Thus, the home is not a factor determining peoples' personalities, but it constitutes a type of hobby, like an interest in house restoration and helping in a small way to preserve an historic buildings. People’s tastes and personalities help shape the house. All three couples did however feel it important that their home reflected their lifestyle and found a middle ground in terms of giving it a modern and cosy feeling, whilst keeping the property in keeping with its' original intention. Thus, each of their homes were a mixture of old and new objects, and an abundance of colours, textures, styles and purposes.
 
Ultimately this age group gained immense satisfaction from their homes, by maintaining a balance of preserving the old and adding their own tastes and preferences to make it a more comfortable place to live.
 
Mature Couples aged between 55 and 70 years
 
Their responses were linked with their stage in the life cycle and their concerns about their future health and the practicalities of the home. One of the three couples had bought the property as their retirement home and the other two recognised they may have to scale-down the size in years to come. The retired couple had bought this house for the practical reason that they were getting older. It was a considerably smaller house than their previous one and although they described it as somewhat ordinary from the outside, their time of having splendid houses were in the past. Their concern were very much focused on the ability to move about with relative ease.
 
Whilst the other two couples mentioned this fact, because they were at the lower end of the age range it was not mentioned as much. Despite being interested in the layout and manageability of the house and garden, the visual impact and comfort of the inside was still very important. Each respondent had a special relationship with their home and no matter how grand or mediocre it looked to others to them it gave them total enjoyment.
 
Surprisingly, there seemed very little gender variations for this age group. What struck me was the similarities in the answers between partners and the three couples. When I mentioned this former fact, I was told that after so many years together knowledge of each others tastes was very well known. Furthermore, their ideas about what they wanted, what they liked and what their homes meant to them were extremely similar. Their tastes had developed and changed over the years, the home being a reflection and embodiment of their lives and interests. Whilst they read interior magazines, any influences they had were felt to be subconscious. They were not concerned with ‘keeping up with the Joneses’, they just ‘liked what they liked’. One female respondent said that she collected paintings, not for any other reason, but because,
 
‘I love them and want to live with them. I gain immense pleasure from looking at them.’
 
To her, the home was a complete sanctuary, a representation of her total happiness. She liked everything in the house, all her possessions, ornaments, collections and so on. Yet, she was not too attached to anything in particular, valuing health above all else.
 
‘Oh, I feel at home everywhere in the house, absolutely. Yes, I think I like all parts of it ... I like everywhere’ (Figure 9)
 
Figure 9 Sitting room with paintings
 
Admiration for the outside of the home was a common theme among this group. The garden was an area that gave immense pleasure, whether one was sitting or working in it. It was a less ordered area, where one could be creative. It allowed people to express themselves, experimenting with ideas that were less timely and costly than experiments within the house. One respondent described his garden in detail and the enjoyment it gave him,
 
‘I like it because its not too controlled, but a kind of ordered nature, but I would like to make it a little more minimalist and suitable for advancing years [laughs], rather than a cottage garden.’ (Figure 10)
 
Figure 10 The garden
 
Finally, all the couples over 40 years of age, and in particular those of 55 spoke of their attachment to their ancestors furniture. They spoke of this furniture as if it still partly belonged to their ancestors, feeling more as guardians of the objects. They treasured these pieces because of their beauty and associations. They marked links with the past, but they were not kept together as an historical area within the home, but were mixed with modern styles and furnishings.
 
My first impressions were that the homes of the 55 to 70 year olds seemed much more ordinary than the homes of the others. All of them seemed very plain looking buildings with little out of the ordinary. However, once inside I was overwhelmed by the richness and variety of their possessions, colours, fabrics and style. The outside had lulled me into thinking they would be plain, uninviting homes, yet they reflected their passions and tastes. If I had met the respondents elsewhere, I would not have been prepared for the visual displays I found. For this group the heart of the home was everywhere. The home was a complete entity and a place of much personal enjoyment and satisfaction. Most of the rooms contained a mixture of furniture given by their ancestors, antiques they had purchased themselves and modern possessions.
 
Summary
 
From the interviews, observations and photographic material, general themes began to emerge. I discovered that the relationship between these people and their homes was not a fixed one, but underwent changes and revisions. Furthermore, people expected different things from their current property, than they had for previous houses and property they expected to purchase in the future. The most notably factors affecting material culture in this project, were age and gender. This is turn, influenced taste and aspirations. A number of common themes arose throughout the research:

• The home environment is a reflection of peoples’ personality, identity and status;

• The aesthetic quality of goods is highly valued;

• Goods involve a combination of instrumental and symbolic elements;

• Symbolic attachments are not necessarily culturally shared meanings, but often relate to personal values;

• Whilst the home is an important indicator of peoples’ lives and tastes, the home can always be reproduced, in the event of a disaster;

• Associations with the home are linked to age and gender.

While not every respondent touched upon all six of these points, most covered the majority of them. These themes are not representative of all middle class people, but they are typical of my sample, who all belonged to the central and upper divisions of the middle classes.
  
Discussion.
 
From this investigation, general themes and more specific patterns relating to age and gender emerged. Whilst none of the theoretical arguments can be adopted entirely to my findings, a number of points they raise are relevant. An examination of material culture involved an inquiry into a complex relationship. As Campbell (1996) rightly warned, it is limiting of social researchers to accept that culturally shared meanings associated with goods, can be easily translated onto the meaning of actions. This is a problem associated with both Veblen’s (1925) and Bourdieu’s (1984) work. In this sense a discussion of objects does not necessarily lend itself to any inquiry of the motives behind consumer purchases. Caution needs to be adopted.
 
My findings highlight that the appropriation of goods involves an complex relationship of instrumental and symbolic elements, including culturally shared meanings and personal attachments. However, I would not go as far as Dittmar (1992) to argue this is always the case and that the combined elements constitute a stable balance. My research shows that the consumption and display of goods involves a number of important issues outlined by the various theoretical positions, but does not mirror any perspective completely. Contrary to production-led arguments, my participants did not seem to portray passive consumers, exploited by media images in their consumption purchases. Artificial needs were not created and reinforced without their awareness, consumers being dupes of the Capitalist mode of production. I found my respondents held a conscious understanding of the aims of advertising and they recognised a more interactive relationship with material possessions, than the theories suggested. Furthermore, such arguments failed to account for the fact that consumers use cultural goods for their own ends. For instance, one couple bought a large Georgian property, not to symbolise their wealth, but to play a part in its restoration and the preservation of its historic beauty. They saw this as a wonderful opportunity to indulge in their ‘hobby’ of restoring old houses.
 
Baudrillard’s (1970) work was an important addition to production-led arguments, because of his emphasis upon advertising and signification. The younger respondents in my study felt that magazines were a mechanism for sustaining desires for goods and a major factor in the creation of the signs and symbols attached to possessions. Their responses though, highlighted the limitations of production-led arguments for its neglect of the utility of objects. For all the respondents, both utility and symbolic elements were combined in the appropriation of most household goods. Many were bought for their functional uses, but were also chosen for their wider symbolic meaning. Their homes and contents held associations with both instrumental and symbolic aspects. The nature of this symbolism is a point to which I now turn.
 
Goods involve a communication of ideas. This communication process incorporates the application of symbolic and motivational factors (Lury 1996). Communication occurs throughout the purchase and display of goods as it relates to common shared meanings affiliated to particular groups and factions (Bourdieu 1984). According to Dittmar (1992), the symbolic qualities of goods refer to both shared cultural meanings and personal values. From my research, communication related more overtly to self-reflection and personal identification, rather than as a purposeful message to others. They highlighted these as the motivational factors behind their purchase of goods.
 
The symbolic meanings attached to their household goods were highly personalised and individual. During the interviews, each respondent disclosed that they treasured their homes and contents for its aesthetic beauty and unique qualities. They denied however, that symbolic attachments related to culturally held beliefs. They seemed to equate this with status symbols, which they associated with negative images. The only respondents who openly admitted to buying goods for their culturally shared meaning were the young female respondents. They were motivated to purchase goods which they believed to be fashionable, but combined this with other motivational factors, such as use-value, aesthetic quality and personal associations. The fact that they bought these goods were also as a marker of their status identity. No shame was associated with gaining pleasure from displaying tasteful goods that friends would also admire. They hoped these goods would symbolise their social standing and that this would be reflected through their good taste.
 
All the respondents with larger properties did not associate their purchasing motives with a desire to symbolise their status. All saw it as an activity ‘other’ people were involved in. From the interview transcripts it would not have been overtly apparent that they lived in such splendid properties. Obviously, when asked to describe their homes, each documented it physical characteristics, but all the respondents downplayed the grandness of their homes. None had purchased their home to gain status prestige. This was contrary to what I had expected from reading Veblen’s (1925), theory about peoples participation in conspicuous consumption activities. Apart from the young female respondents, all others adamantly denied that they bought goods to symbolise their status. This however, does not constitute that their possessions were not equated with culturally held symbols by others. Each interviewee did recognise the culturally shared meanings associated with some of their possessions, but they denied this was a motive behind their purchase. Whilst, I agree that this may be true, I think it may have played a more subconscious role than they realise. However, to claim that their motives involved elements of conspicuous consumption would be to translate the meaning of goods onto the meaning of action. This is the very practice Campbell (1996) criticised other sociologists for doing. Information obtained was extrapolated from what the respondents themselves said and from my observations of how they interacted with their homes and possessions. I did not note whether they owned certain goods and infer meaning from them. A combination of responses and observations of their interaction with their material environment, helped me to gain a more representative account. What most respondents hoped their homes constituted was a warm and welcoming environment, rather than a symbol of wealth. They felt that they did not need large homes or praise from others, but bought their homes simply because they loved them and would enjoy living in them.
 
From my research I found that goods do carry social meanings as Bourdieu (1984) asserted. He was correct when he claimed that people are neither fully conscious of their motives, nor passive consumers. Bourdieu (1984) argued that social action, and by this he meant consumption motives, lies somewhere between these two positions. Whilst their homes and possessions carried a vast amount of symbolic meaning, whether cultural or personal, the respondents could not always readily identify with the full extent of their motives. Thus, the use of observation helped to complete the full picture of the relationship people have with their homes.
 
The most important quality that the home signified was the pleasure it gave to them. The design of the house and its possessions gave them infinite personal satisfaction and reaffirmed their own sense of self. It is crucial to recognise that possessions do not have a singular fixed meaning. Peoples’ possessions and the ways they interact with them constitute different meanings. For instance, a very plain room can represent order and style to some and scarcity and lack of vibrancy to others.
 
The younger respondents were more eager to show that they owned what they held to be desirable property. Even so, they stated they bought it for the lack of work it required and its suitable location for work. The older respondents all said their purchase had be motivated by the aesthetic beauty of the property. However, the very character of their homes were communicating messages, however subconsciously this may have been to them. One could not have failed to be impressed by this catalogue of impressive, yet varied styles and design of homes. Respondents spoke of the pleasure their homes gave to them as an important part of the relationship between them and their possessions. However, homes cannot escape the wider meanings they communicate to ‘others’. Of all the homes I visited I was struck by the presentation of them. They were all, what I would term ‘lived in’, but were also very orderly. Even those who thought their homes looked cluttered, were immaculate. All the respondents were from the middle-class category, and their homes reflected their ‘relative’ wealth, as all had necessities and a long list of luxury items. Even the young couples, who were decorating and furnishing their homes slowly, because of reduced funds, had fairly well furnished homes. From my observations the homes reflected that they were professional couples, who enjoyed a range of interests, from house restoration and decoration, to gardening and pursuits away from the home. The interests of the younger couples aged between 20 to 30 years were reflected within the interior of their homes, whilst those of 30 years and above showed a greater interest in the exterior style of their properties. Those above 40 years of age demonstrated interest in all areas of their houses. I had not expected such an affinity with specific areas of the home in accordance with age. Space seemed to be an important part of the home environment, with certain rooms affecting the way they conceptualised their homes and identity. This is not to suggest that other areas of the house are disliked or an incorrect representation of the self and their lifestyles, but that different areas represent the multiplicity of their tastes and preferences. The respondents over 55 years saw the home as a inter-linked space, with common themes throughout. The home constituted an entire place of enjoyment. None of these issues had been contemplated prior to my research.
 
All interviewees belonged to the middle classes, but were from different areas within this category, each with their varied tastes and preferences. This explains why their houses differed in character and physical structure. The youngest age range were the most similar in their responses, including their likes and aspirations. Those between 55 and 70 years displayed almost identical answers between partners and similarities were evident throughout this age group. Those between 30 and 55 years held similarities, but their desire towards owning unusual, unique homes was formed in different images. Each wanted to create a home environment which reflected them, and as Bourdieu (1984) explained, possessions are as much about marking social differences as they are about striving to achieve group status measures.
 
My findings in part relate to Dittmar’s (1992) work. Dittmar saw the meaning of possessions for identity, as a combination of instrumental and symbolic aspects. By instrumental, she argues that objects have a use-related function, whether it gives rise to emotional significance or in some way signifies that experience (Dittmar 1992:89). The symbolic character embodies two areas; self-expressive aspects, like objects reflecting personal qualities or signifying relationships and categorical aspects which symbolise group membership, social position, and status (Dittmar 1992:89). Whilst I agree that possessions embody these meaning categories, it is not as clear cut as Dittmar suggests. These meanings are often greatly intertwined and less easily identifiable as distinctive meanings. One factor that this research could not identify was whether some goods become personalised because of their categorical associated status. A consumer would be reluctant to admit this, and possibly unaware that they may consume something partly for its cultural meaning and then translate this into a meaning affecting ones self-identity. Thus, by personalising goods, the meaning or initial motivation to purchase may diminish. This is not to suggest that my respondents were blatantly denying they were involved in buying goods for their cultural associations, but that whilst they manipulate goods for their own ends, they are not always fully aware they incorporate this complex web of consumption motives.
 
Associations with a past era, having a family heirloom or goods with personal experiences attached to them were common themes running throughout the responses. The younger respondents treasured items because they symbolised a particular place, time or relationship. These associations were attached to goods, from a piece of furniture to jewellery. Those over 55 years all mentioned their passion for a family heirloom. The aesthetical quality of the objects seemed to be enhanced through this association. All the female respondents displayed a special relationship with particular objects for one of these associations. This theme was also common among the male respondents over 30 years. Similar points were highlighted by Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton from their empirical investigation (1981).
 
The aesthetic value of goods was a reoccurring theme in all of the interviews. People loved their homes and their possessions for their visual beauty. For the younger respondents pleasure was tied with the process of daydreaming, in as much as their pleasure was related to their fantasies about what they would one day possess. This relates to Campbell’s (1989) theory of ‘dream worlds’. However, my investigation did not measure if this became a disillusioning experience when they eventually purchased these goods. However, from the answers from the other age categories, all seemed to experience immense satisfaction from their homes and contents, a satisfaction which seemed to escalate with time. So whilst pleasure and fantasy are involved in modern consumption, this is not disheartening experience.
 
Only one question was asked in relation to advertising, which explains why this project has not attempted to investigate its importance to consumption. From the responses to the question I did ask, most were aware of the importance of advertising in creating and sustaining images, but all thought their influences were subconscious. What I did discover was that people manipulated these images for their own ends. They may adopt a certain colour scheme seen in a magazine, but would furnish the rest of the room differently. Most incorporated a mixture of styles, and influences and tried to personalise their goods and furnishings.
 
The major criticism of those writing about material culture is their assumption that objects hold similar meanings. Possessions do not have equal value, and whilst people may treasure certain household possessions, they may be indifferent others or to the property. When trying to understand the relationship between people and goods, it must be remembered that many goods do not hold symbolic meanings or have functional properties. Whilst it would be incorrect to state they mean nothing, many objects simply exist and have no special relationship with their owners. It would be wrong to assume that all objects has intrinsic meanings for their owners, as many are never considered. Some possessions do not hold special meaning. However, generally speaking, I agree with those working under the framework of Material Culture studies that homes are a reflection of people’s identity and status.
 
Material possessions are vital in terms of expressing identity to the self, in terms of personal and social identity. From the interviews it was very apparent that people, especially the younger respondents were eager to get their home ‘finished’ to make they themselves feel more complete, with a firmly established sense of self. The home was an very important part of this achievement. What needs to be remembered is that identity is not only created through our relationship with objects, but also in part through interaction with others and how they interpret our material possessions. From my observations, it was the interaction of the respondents with their homes that struck me as important. They seemed to gain immense satisfaction from showing me their rooms, items and collections. It was their chance to show what these objects really did ‘mean’ to them. They seemed to gain pleasure from my appreciation of their homes and contents. So, whilst peoples overriding motive for purchasing goods may not be to mark their social standing, it is an inherent part of the act of possession and display.
 
What I hope to have demonstrated is that meaning is derived from meaningful action. It does not adhere in objects themselves. It is only in so far as people use objects in the course of engaging in actions that objects are likely to have meaning at all. I have tried to avoid the trap that many sociologists fall into; that all objects have meaning for the people who own or use them. Meaning relates to our interaction with objects.
 
Conclusion.
 
This thesis sought to examine the relationship between people and material possessions. Those working from a ‘lifestyle and identity’ position and those affiliated with the Material Cultural perspective have contributed the most important work to this area. What is evident from my research, however, is the lack of consensus in this field. This area requires a comprehensive theoretical and methodological approach to uncover the relationship between household possessions and consumers. Many social researchers to date have fallen into the trap of inferring the meaning of actions from the meaning of goods. This inquiry moves beyond such limitations, highlighting the complexities involved in understanding consumers’ motives. This reiterates the need for a combined approach towards data collection. People are never fully aware of the extent of their motives, but neither are they passive consumers. As Bourdieu (1984) explained, social action lies somewhere between the two. Interviews alone would have been unrepresentative of my respondents’ purchasing motives. Observation and photographic data supplemented my findings, adding to its reliability.
 
A number of common themes have emerged, along with more specific points relating to age and gender: the home is a reflection of peoples’ identity and personality; the aesthetic quality of goods is an important aspect of consumption; goods incorporate functional and symbolic elements; and these symbolic elements can be culturally held meanings or personal associations. An empirical investigation has highlighted the practical issues required for understanding consumer motives. Whilst theoretical writings were useful as a starting point, some writers such as Lury (1996) lacked the empirical data to legitimise their assertions.
 
This research is a useful introduction to a neglected area of study. According to Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton, ‘Social scientists have tended to look for the understanding of human life in the internal psychic processes of the individual or in the patterns of relationships between people; rarely do they consider the role of material objects’ (Dittmar 1992:15). The role of material possessions has been overlooked in the part it plays in the construction of self. This project has contributed in some way towards an understanding of material culture. It has reinvigorated its importance as an area of sociological inquiry, giving the theoretical arguments greater immediacy. Future research would benefit from funding to enable a larger sample to be analysed. This could be directed towards a range of social groups, to discover whether purchasing motives relate to one’s social class, religion and ethnicity, in addition to age and gender. Furthermore, it would allow for an examination of the motives behind advertising, by collecting extensive data from magazine editors.
 
In sum, goods are part of a wider communication system, establishing links between their owners and others. Meanings are not fixed, but involve a complex system of functional and symbolic aspects, which can be personal rather than culturally held. All goods however, are not drowned in symbolic meaning; many of our everyday possessions go unnoticed and have little impact upon our lives. Overriding this is the important part our homes play in the construction of our sense of self. Goods are highly personalised, reflecting individual and cultural symbols. Also, whether intentionally or not, our homes communicate meaning to others. The culturally held meanings associated with the ownership of certain objects or a style of house, do not constitute the only or the main motive behind their purchase, but people do infer meaning from our possessions.
 
Notes.

[1] The argument that people are free, rational thinking beings is found within ethnomethodological accounts and in some social psychological descriptions (Lee 1993: 31).

[2] The new bourgeoisie in the media and communication services, the new petite bourgeoisie of the ‘cultural intermediaries’ and ‘expressive professionals’ and the technical aides to these groups (Smee 1997:326).

[3] It has continued to be widely used in social anthropology (Fyfe and Law 1988: 2).

[4] Of which two were couples.

References.

Baudrillard, J. (1970) The System of Objects. London : New York.

Bourdieu, P. (1984) Distinction : A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. London : Routledge & Kegan Paul 1984.

Brewer, J. and Porter, R. (1993) Consumption and the World of Goods.  London: Routledge.

Campbell, C. (1996) "The Meaning of Objects and the Meaning of Actions", in Journal of Material Culture, Vol. 1: No.1.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991) The Meaning of Things : Domestic Symbols and the Self. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. and Rochberg, E. (1981) The Meaning of Things: Domestic Symbols and the Self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dittmar, H. (1992) The Social Psychology of Material Possessions. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Douglas, M. and Ishelwood, B. (1979) The World of Goods: Towards an Anthropology of Consumption. Suffolk: Allen Lane.

Douglas, M. and Ishelwood, B. (1980) The World of Goods : Towards an Anthropology of Consumption. London : Allen Lane.

Featherstone, M. (1991) Consumer Culture and Postmodernism. London: Sage.

Formaneck, R. (1994) "Why they Collect: Collectors Reveal their Motivations", in Pearce, S.M. (ed) Interpreting Objects and Collections. London: Routledge.

Fyfe, G. and Law, J. (1988) "On the Invisibility of the Visual: Editors Introduction", in Fyfe, G. and Law, J. (eds) Picturing Power: Visual Depiction and Social Relations.  London: Routledge.

Hibbert, C. (1987) The English: A Social History. London: Guild Publishing

Howard, K. and Sharp, J.A. (1983) The Management of a Student Research Project. Hants: Gower.

Lee, M.J. (1993) Consumer Culture Reborn: The Cultural Politics of Consumption. London: Routledge.

Lury,C. (1996) Consumer Culture. Cambridge: Polity Press.

McCracken, G. (1988) Culture and Consumption: New Approaches to the Symbolic Character of Consumer Goods and Activities. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

McKendrick, N., Brewer, J. and Plumb, J.B. (1982) The Birth of a Consumer Society: The Commercialisation of Eighteenth Century England. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Miller, D. (1987) Material Culture and Mass Consumption. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Moore, N. (1987) How to do Research. London: The Library Association.

Mukerji, C. (1983) From Graven Images: Patterns of Modern Materialism. New York: Columbian University Press.

O’Connell Davidson, J. and Layder, D. (1994) Methods, Sex and Madness. London: Routledge.

Smee, M. (1977) "Consumption and Identity before going to College, 1970-73", Nava, M., Blake, A., MacRury, I., Richards, B. (eds) Buy this Book: Studies in Advertising and Consumption. London: Routledge

Veblen,T. (1925) The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institution. London: Allen and Unwin.

Williams, R.H. (1982) Dream Worlds: Mass Consumption in the Late Nineteenth Century France. USA: California Press Ltd.

Sophie Gibson gained an MSc in Social Sciences Research Methods from Leicester University in September 1997.  After graduating she worked for Bretton Hall College in West Yorkshire, carrying out a training needs analysis of textile employees and a baseline study of the cultural industries.  She currently works as a Market Researcher for City of York Council, where she specialises in Best Value reviews of council services and undertakes consultancy work on behalf of local authorities throughout the country.

IJULL Last Updated:

© 1999-2007 International Journal of Urban Labour and Leisure