Danielle Wong – Vicarious or Conspicuous?

Posted: February 14, 2014 in Uncategorized

Our discussions in class reminded myself of this sketch from Jimmy Kimmel. It is a satire to the show Toddlers and Tiaras with Tom Hanks.  Of course, this is a spin-off of the actual show, however, I like how it exaggerates the examples of Veblen’s reading of conspicuous and vicarious consumption. For instance, his daughter’s possession of material goods represent the wealth and status of Tom Hanks.

  1. cs341blog says:

    Elaina Christaki

    When considering “Toddlers and Tiaras”, I never thought about how it could be an example of both conspicuous and vicarious consumption. Yes, the parents show their wealth by participating in these extravagant pageants, but I never considered the consumption of the child. They are vicariously consuming through the wealth of their parents. This idea can be linked with the “Rich Kids of Instagram” that we talked about it class. They vicariously consume through their parents wealth, which helps to reinforce already existing class divisions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s