Paul Bloom - The Lure of Luxury by

Thesis

cmz73 — 2025-02-10 19:57:40 UTC

In The Lure of Luxury, Paul Bloom claims that we are strongly influenced by the history of an object, compared to the signal the item sends or the sensory properties it possesses. Bloom explicitly states that although signaling theory and sensory properties matter, history is the main factor in our consumer choices, “We respond to what we believe are objects' deeper properties, including their histories. Sensory properties are relevant, and so is signaling, but the pleasure we get from the right sort of history explains much of the lure of luxury items – and of more mundane consumer items as well.” (Bloom 4). While signaling and sensory plays a part in consumerism, history plays a larger role, as history is in everything and surrounds our lives.

Claim I

cmz73 — 2025-02-10 19:58:02 UTC

Postrel claims that the attraction to luxury goods is from the aesthetics and pleasure the items provide, not the meaning behind them. Bloom counters by claiming that while this plays a part, it is not practical, as when faced with two items of similar quality, look, and feel, the consumer will often choose the more expensive or name brand version. We gravitate towards the name brand because of the history behind the item, where it was made, who made it, who came into contact with it, and what company name is on the tag.

Claim II

cmz73 — 2025-02-17 19:57:00 UTC

Bloom claims that the history of items is most important to us, regardless of the signal the item sends or the sensory pleasure it provides, “We can be influenced by the history of an object even when it has nothing to do with communicating status or with differences in quality.” (Bloom 5). Over time, items create their stories and histories, whether that is through a well-loved jacket or a piece of family memorabilia. Seemingly “useless” items acquire value with time and memories.

Evidence

cmz73 — 2025-02-17 19:58:04 UTC

In Living it Up (2002), James Twichell talks about his experience in an Armani store with his daughter, Postrel comments on how Twichells daughter became entranced with the Armani suit fabric, claiming that she liked the fabric because it felt good, that we are attracted to clothes by their visual and tactile qualities rather than their meaning or history. Bloom counters that with the example that if there were an affordable suit with the same feel and qualities, it would not have as much appeal as the Armani suit would: “If pleasure is triggered by the physical properties of what we are looking at or touching, then it shouldn’t matter what we think it is. But it does matter.” (Bloom 5). If pleasure was just from the sensory experience, then touching any fabric of similar texture would bring the same pleasure, but our knowledge of the product, its history, or its value will affect how we view it, consciously and subconsciously.

Evidence

cmz73 — 2025-02-17 19:58:13 UTC

Bloom writes about the value of our personal belongings and memorabilia. The items may not have any tangible value or serve a purpose, “Such objects serve no practical purpose” (Bloom 7), but we still continue to collect these items. We keep them safe on a bookshelf or hidden away in a shoe box in a closet. Bloom uses children's teddy bears as an example. Bloom and a Psychologist Bruce Hood conducted a study where they offered children their original stuffed animals, or what they told them was an exact copy, the children were inclined to choose the original. They chose the original because, like Bloom says, “these are unique items with special stories behind them.” (Bloom 7). The history and love behind personal items will always trump sensory or signaling.

Connections

cmz73 — 2025-02-17 20:11:14 UTC

Paul Bloom's arguments line up together while also sometimes contradicting each other. In claim two, Bloom says that history is the most important factor in consumerism, regardless of signaling or sensory. He goes into detail about why and provides examples supporting this claim. At the same time, in claim one, he says that all three are vital, not decreasing signaling and sensory the way he does in claim two. While these two claims contradict each other, they also intersect with Bloom's emphasis on history in both claims. Bloom continues to go into detail on signaling theory in claim three, incorporating examples like advertisements and the "arms race" (Bloom 3) that we are forced into. While different, all three support Bloom's main idea of how history shapes consumerism.

Evidence

cmz73 — 2025-02-18 09:19:00 UTC

In the book Spent: Sex, Evolution, and Consumer Behavior (2009), Geoffrey Miller explains how instead of spending $30,000 on a Rolex, someone could easily find a knockoff watch online for $1,200. The knock-off has the same quality, feel, and look, so much so that only an expert could tell it's not authentic. This covers sensory theory and signaling theory as no one can tell it's a fake, but still, people continue to purchase the real Rolex over the knockoff. Bloom says this is “an embarrassment to sensory theories, but it is also troubling to signaling explanations.” (Bloom 5). It debunks their theories. Bloom continues to explicate how the history of the watch affects the consumer's purchase.

Evidence

cmz73 — 2025-02-18 09:58:44 UTC

Bloom describes the endowment effect and the Ikea effect, the endowment effect is when you value an object more if you own it, as well as if you chose it or had to work hard to get it. A sense of pride and accomplishment keeps you attached to the object. This also applies to the Ikea effect, when you value something more if you build it yourself. Something becomes more emotionally valuable if it takes a lot of effort or time to complete. Bloom finishes his claim with, “Thus the history of an object matters to the pleasure we get from it.” (Bloom 6). Bloom highlights how our value in an object is shaped by the personal effort put into it.

Evidence

cmz73 — 2025-02-18 10:12:02 UTC

Bloom argues that signaling is aggressive in advertisements. Our purchases shape how other people see us. Bloom gives examples of how: “Your neighbors gasp as your car drives by; the attractive stranger in a bar is aroused by your choice of beer; your spouse and children love you because you bought the right brand of frozen pizza.” (Bloom 3). Bloom implies that if you make the wrong purchase, your family will no longer love you, and if you choose the wrong beer, no one will be drawn towards you in a bar. When we see these types of advertisements, we believe these fantasies to be true and make our consumer choices based on how others will react.

Claim III

cmz73 — 2025-02-21 04:32:48 UTC

Bloom claims that we value goods more if other people are impressed by them. While we may be unaware of it, we all want to signal attractive traits. Bloom says that we want to impress others; “we are driven to accumulate ostentatious goods to impress others.” (Bloom 3). Bloom uses the word “ostentatious” meaning to display in a manner to attract attention or admiration. With the use of ostentatious alone, he is saying that we are desperate for validation from others.

Evidence

cmz73 — 2025-02-21 04:34:54 UTC

Bloom and Robert H. Frank agree that signaling is a slippery slope that leads to a ‘“figurative arms race that economist Robert H. Frank calls “luxury fever”’ (Bloom 3). It is nearly impossible to avoid signaling in everyday life, as our society is built on norms, values, and expectations that force us to conform to societal pressures. Bloom provides an example of the norm of dressing nice for a job interview, “If everyone else buys fancy suits for their job interviews, then I risk unemployment by choosing not to.” (Bloom 3). If everyone else is signaling, an individual doesn't have as good of a chance in a certain situation unless they are also trying to signal the same thing.