LIFE STYLE
Lifestyle is the
interests, opinions, behaviours, and behavioural orientations of an individual,
group, or culture. The term was introduced by Austrian psychologist Alfred Adler with the meaning of "a person's
basic character as established early in childhood", for example in his
1929 book "The Case of Miss R.". The broader sense of lifestyle as a
"way or style of living" has been documented since 1961. Lifestyle is
a combination of determining intangible or tangible factors. Tangible factors
relate specifically to demographic variables,
i.e. an individual's demographic profile, whereas intangible factors concern
the psychological aspects of an individual such as personal values,
preferences, and outlooks.
A rural
environment has different lifestyles compared to an urban metropolis. Location is important even within an
urban scope. The nature of the neighborhood in which a person resides affects
the set of lifestyles available to that person due to differences between
various neighborhoods' degrees of affluence and proximity to natural and
cultural environments. For example, in areas within a close proximity to the
sea, a surf culture or lifestyle can often be present.
INDIVIDUAL IDENTITY:-
A lifestyle
typically reflects an individual's attitudes, way of life, values, or world view. Therefore, a lifestyle is a means of
forging a sense of self and to create
cultural symbols that resonate with personal identity. Not
all aspects of a lifestyle are voluntary. Surrounding social and technical
systems can constrain the lifestyle choices available to the individual and the
symbols she/he is able to project to others and the self.
The lines
between personal identity and the everyday doings that signal a particular
lifestyle become blurred in modern society. For example, "green lifestyle" means holding beliefs and
engaging in activities that consume fewer resources and produce less harmful
waste (i.e. a smaller ecological footprint),
and deriving a sense of self from holding these beliefs and engaging in these
activities. Some commentators argue that, in modernity, the cornerstone of lifestyle
construction is consumption behavior, which offers the possibility to create
and further individualize the self with different products or services that
signal different ways of life.
Lifestyle may
include views on politics, religion, health, intimacy, and more. All of these
aspects play a role in shaping someone's lifestyle In the magazine and television industries, "lifestyle" is
used to describe a category of publications or programs.
HISTORY OF LIFESTYLES STUDIES:-
Three main
phases can be identified in the history of lifestyles studies:
Lifestyles and
social position
Earlier studies
on lifestyles focus on the analysis of social structure and of the individuals’
relative positions inside it. Thorstein Veblen, with his ‘emulation’ concept,
opens this perspective by asserting that people adopt specific ‘schemes of
life’, and in particular specific patterns of ‘conspicuous consumption’,
depending on a desire for distinction from social strata they identify as
inferior and a desire for emulation of the ones identified as superior. Max Weber intends lifestyles as distinctive
elements of status groups strictly connected with a dialectic of recognition of
prestige: the lifestyle is the most visible manifestation of social
differentiation, even within the same social class, and in particular it shows
the prestige which the individuals believe they enjoy or to which they aspire. Georg Simmel carries out formal analysis of
lifestyles, at the heart of which can be found processes of individualization,
identification, differentiation, and recognition, understood both as generating
processes of, and effects generated by, lifestyles, operating “vertically” as
well as “horizontally”. Finally, Pierre Bourdieu renews this approach within a
more complex model in which lifestyles, made up mainly of social practices and
closely tied to individual tastes, represent the basic point of intersection
between the structure of the field and processes connected with the habits.
Lifestyles as
styles of thought
The approach
interpreting lifestyles as principally styles of thought has its roots in the
soil of psychological analysis. Initially, starting with Alfred Adler, a lifestyle was understood as a
style of personality, in the sense that the framework of guiding values and
principles which individuals develop in the first years of life end up defining
a system of judgement which informs their actions throughout their lives.
Later, particularly in Milton Rokeach’s
work, Arnold Mitchell’s
VALS research and Lynn Kahle’s
LOV research, lifestyles’ analysis developed as profiles of values, reaching
the hypothesis that it is possible to identify various models of scales of
values organized hierarchically, to which different population sectors
correspond. Then with Daniel Yankelovich
and William Wells we move on to the so-called AIO
approach in which attitudes, interests and opinions are considered as
fundamental lifestyles’ components, being analysed from both synchronic and
diachronic points of view and interpreted on the basis of socio-cultural trends
in a given social context (as, for instance, in Bernard
Cathelat’s work). Finally, a further development leads to the
so-called profiles-and-trends approach, at the core of which is an analysis of
the relations between mental and behavioural variables, bearing in mind that
socio-cultural trends influence both the diffusion of various lifestyles within
a population and the emerging of different modalities of interaction between thought
and action.
Lifestyles as
styles of action
Analysis of
lifestyles as action profiles is characterized by the fact that it no longer
considers the action level as a simple derivative of lifestyles, or at least as
their collateral component, but rather as a constitutive element. In the
beginning, this perspective focussed mainly on consumer behaviour, seeing
products acquired as objects expressing on the material plane individuals’ self-image
and how they view their position in society. Subsequently, the perspective
broadened to focus more generally on the level of daily life, concentrating –
as in authors such as Joffre
Dumazedier and Anthony Giddens – on the use of time, especially
loisirs, and trying to study the interaction between the active dimension of
choice and the dimension of routine and structuration which characterize that
level of action. Finally, some authors, for instance Richard Jenkins and A. J. Veal,
suggested an approach to lifestyles in which it is not everyday actions which
make up the plane of analysis but those which the actors who adopt them
consider particularly meaningful and distinctive.
HEALTH:-
A healthy or
unhealthy lifestyle will most likely be transmitted across generations.
According to the study done by Case et al. (2002), when a 0-3 year old child
has a mother who practices a healthy lifestyle, this child will be 27% more
likely to become healthy and adopt the same lifestyle. For instance, high
income parents are more likely to eat organic food, have time to exercise, and
provide the best living condition to their children. On the other hand, low
income parents are more likely to participate in unhealthy activities such as
smoking to help them release poverty-related stress and depression. Parents are
the first teacher for every child. Everything that parents do will be very
likely transferred to their children through the learning process.
Adults may be
drawn together by mutual interest that results in a lifestyle. For example, William Dufty described how pursuing a sugar-free
diet led to such associations:
I have come to
know hundreds of young people who have found that illness or bingeing on drugs
and sugar became the doorway to health. Once they reestablished their own
health, we had in common our interest in food. If one can use that overworked
word lifestyle, we shared a sugarfree lifestyle. I kept in touch with many of
them in campuses and communes, through their travels here and abroad and
everywhere. One day you meet them in Boston. The next week you run into them in
Southern California.
MEDIA CULTURE:-
The term lifestyle
was introduced in the 1950s as a derivative of that of style in art:
"Life-styles",
the culture industry’s recycling of style in art, represent the transformation
of an aesthetic category, which once possessed a moment of negativity
[shocking, emancipatory], into a quality of commodity consumption.
Theodor W. Adorno noted that there is a "culture
industry" in which the mass media is involved,
but that the term "mass culture" is inappropriate:
In our drafts,
we spoke of "mass culture." We replaced that expression with
"culture industry" in order to exclude from the outset the
interpretation agreeable to its advocates: that it is a matter of something
like a culture that arises spontaneously from the masses themselves, the
contemporary form of popular art.
Diversity is
more effectively present in mass media than previously, but this is not an
obvious or unequivocal gain. By the late 1950s, the homogenization of
consciousness had become counterproductive for the purposes of capital
expansion; new needs for new commodities had to be created, and this required
the reintroduction of the minimal negativity that had been previously
eliminated. The cult of the new that had been the prerogative of art throughout
the modernist epoch into the period of post-war unification and stabilization
has returned to capital expansion from which it originally sprang. But this
negativity is neither shocking nor emancipatory since it does not presage a
transformation of the fundamental structures of everyday life. On the contrary,
through the culture industry capital has co-opted the dynamics of negation both
diachronically in its restless production of new and "different"
commodities and synchronically in its promotion of alternative
"life-styles."
No comments:
Post a Comment