The Objects Of My Life

"He who knows he has enough is rich" - Lao Tzu

I have started to reflect on the objects of my life. The things I own and have collected over the years. I am increasingly asking myself what I really value and want in my life. What are those "things" that matter? I like the simplicity of the Marie Kondo filter "does this bring me joy?". But for me, I like even better a "what if" approach. "What if", this "thing", piece of furniture, piece of clothing, piece of decoration, piece of kitchenware...etc. Was not in my life/home? Would I miss it? Would I buy it if I saw it today for the first time? Would I be truly happy if it was offered to me as a present? 

It is clear for me today that very few objects for which I would say yes without any hesitation. 

Those few things are mostly beautiful and meaningful things. Some paintings. A couple of masks and objects I collected during trips. A few clothes carefully chosen over the years. A small selection of books of what used to be a 1000 books collection.  The photo albums of my wedding and those with photos of our small kids, before we migrated to digital.

This model applies a little less well to functional objects of your daily life. I call them "the basics" and the inventory of those varies with economic, social and cultural context. The list is obviously much longer in the US than in let's say...Morocco. The list will also differ as the Morocco list will have some cookware which are specific to Moroccan culture. A tall silver tea pot, a Tagine pot. My rule when it comes to basic objects is simplicity, unicity (or a reasonable amount on the case i.e. of dishes), and when possible picking a durable object with a design I like. 

There is quite a lot of literature on that topic, from often simplistic Marxist approaches (focused on the production of objects) to thinkers looking at the consumption of things. Baudrillard , a French philosopher, has developed a useful framework to think about objects in our life and society.

Baudrillard came to this conclusion by criticising Marx's concept of "use-value". Baudrillard thought that both Marx's and Adam Smith’s economic thought accepted the idea of genuine needs relating to genuine uses too easily and too simply. Baudrillard argues that needs are constructed, rather than innate. He stresses that all purchases, because they always signify something socially, have their fetishistic side. Objects always, drawing from Roland Barthes, "say something" about their users.

“In symbolic exchange, of which the gift is our most proximate illustration, the object is not an object: it is inseparable from the concrete relation in which it is exchanged, the transferential pact that it seals between two persons: it is thus not independent as such. It has, properly speaking, neither use value nor (economic) exchange value. The object given has symbolic exchange value.” 
― Jean Baudrillard

Braudrillard wrote that there are four ways of an object obtaining value. The four value-making processes are:

1.    The first is the functional value of an object; its instrumental purpose (use value). A pen, for instance, writes; a refrigerator cools.

2.    The second is the exchange value of an object; its economic value. One pen may be worth three pencils; and one refrigerator may be worth the salary earned by three months of work.

3.    The third is the symbolic value of an object; a value that a subject assigns to an object in relation to another subject (i.e., between a giver and receiver). A pen might symbolize a student's school graduation gift or a commencement speaker's gift; or a diamond may be a symbol of publicly declared marital love.

4.    The last is the sign value of an object; its value within a system of objects. A particular pen may, while having no added functional benefit, signify prestige relative to another pen; a diamond ring may have no function at all, but may suggest particular social values, such as taste or class.

I have found that framework useful to think about some of the objects that populate my life and the role that objects/ "owning stuff" play in our society. And for me, the most valuable things I own have got symbolic value. And it matters to me. But yes, some of those objects can go through a decluttering process through:

-Digitalise: our books, papers, CDs, DVDs and photos)

-Reduce: keeping one piece of clothing, one set of something you like, removing duplicates...

-Repurpose: refreshing some piece of clothing by changing the buttons, giving some of my clothes to my daughter, repainting a chair to give it a new life rather than buying new “stuff”

-Give: to family, friends, libraries or schools (book & toys), charities, or use Freecycle.org or the Streetbank app to give to people in your neighourhoods.

-Throw away:  when none of the above options are available, trying to recycle using a local recycling center (London map). 

I have, over the years, given many many books in French and English to local libraries and to my schools.  I am continuing that process currently with a lot of the children books my kids Alice and Thomas have accumulated since they were just able to turn the pages and look at pictures. I regularly give away many family clothes (which seem to multiply by magic!).... I do love the “BAG IT, BEAT IT” programme by the British Heart Foundation. Bags are piling up in my bedroom and corridor and I cannot wait to make that phone call to have the British Heart Foundation pick them up once I will have filled them.

Simply Yours,