An old proverb
relates trash
and treasure
as a matter of perspective.
In Waste and Want, Susan
Strasser describes American’s
changing perspectives on waste from the colonial era to
our own day.
In the colonial and revolutionary
period of American history,
manufactured
objects were rare and expensive. Repair and mending were common even among the
wealthy because it was difficult and costly to replace objects. In addition,
the various types of home industry practiced by both men and women equipped
them with skills in handling materials that made them adept at repair. Even
when and object was beyond repair, it parts, or the material it was made of,
might be usefully repurposed themselves or as part of an assembly. This lack of
goods and facility with handling materials made bricolage
common. Because things had durable value, people had a sense of stewardship
relating to them.
Strasser establishes this as a beginning state. The development of industry
and consumerism
led to a current state in which all of these have been reversed. We have an
abundance of goods, and many of them are inexpensive. We work in factories and
offices where we do not develop skills for repair, and particularly have lost
familiarity with materials needed for practical bricolage. These and other
forces, particularly those related to health
and cleanliness,
have resulted in waste being something of the home where additional value may
be extracted to something that is the realm of specialists that is taken away
and handled by government
agencies or specialized companies.
There are many stages in this development. It is interesting to me that
the value of household waste as raw materials American industry provided a
mechanism for poor
and rural
people to purchase manufactured goods. Even so, as industrialization made more
goods available, along with larger quantities of more manageable waste,
household waste became less valuable, and reuse and recycling
became associated with poverty.
By the end of the 1920s, consumer
culture was established in America, and it reinforced the trends identified by
Strasser. Planned obsolescence was
developed in the automotive
industry, and along with the craze for fashion, it took
hold for almost all consumer goods. Even during the Great
Depression, when lack of credit and unemployment made doing it yourself
attractive, there was an assumption that people had access to new and old
consumer goods and their packaging. Even during this period of economic
distress, demand for certain types of consumer goods grew. Thrift was
reimaged for a consumer age. For instance, refrigerators became commonplace,
and instead of being presented as luxury items they
were sold on the notion of thrift, allowing housewives to save on food by
keeping leftovers and buying in bulk.
People were encouraged to conserve
and recycle to support the war effort during World War II.
However, this did little to reverse changing attitudes that valued the new over
the old and saw little value in trash. People had jobs and
money, and
wartime rationing created a pent up demand for goods that was unleased after
the war. Disposable goods and packaging represented cleanliness and
convenience; it was freedom from dirt and drudgery. There was no value in
trash, which was taken away by collectors.
There were reactions against this even in the 1950s. They grew
into the counterculture
of the 1960s
and 1970s,
which were skeptical
of corporations and consumerism. The environmental
movement also grew out of this counterculture. Reuse of second-hand goods
became more acceptable for even middle-class
families, though few had the skills
needed to rework these items to make them seem new or adapt them to current
fashion. Little used goods were seen to have some value that could be recovered
through yard sales. (I grew up on a stretch of highway that now boasts and
annual 100 mile yard sale.)
This counterculture has not resulted in a broad return to a stewardship
of things. Strasser suggests that a rising ethic of environmental or resource
stewardship may lead to the mitigation of problems related to the abundant
trash created by disposable and rapidly obsolete goods. There is no turning
back, but we might find new reasons and ways to reduce use, reuse, and recycle.
