Transvaluation of Values Watch
posted by Frank Pasquale
The Oxford Press series on the seven deadly sins was a notable sign of the intellectual times. Many of the books argued that the so-called sin was not really so bad after all. For example, far from the menacing images of Bosch and Cadmus, Francine Prose’s essay on gluttony offered “a feast of fine writing on the sweetest sin of all.”
The Situationist’s recent series on appearance competition/indulgence brought Prose’s point to mind. For example, in the post on “Spas and Girls,” they note:
Teens spend some $9.7 billion a year on beauty products, and cosmetic and beauty aids are among the most advertised in teen magazines. Vanderbilt[ researcher Patricia] Gesell is afraid that exposure to beauty treatments at too young an age pushes girls to be older before their time.
But parents appear eager for some time with the kids, whatever its form: “That bonding time that used to happen over dinner is now happening over manicures and pedicures.”
The piece made me wonder: Are we edging toward a “transvaluation of values,” elevating the types of traits that used to be considered character flaws into strengths? Does a site like Ugly Outfits NYC essentially declare the lack of vanity a shortcoming?
Admittedly, the cultural reaction against those who appear gluttonous is extremely strong, even in the face of increasing evidence that there’s little hope in dieting. Perhaps that’s because technology gives rise to what Nikolas Rose calls “responsibilization:”
[There is an] increasing emphasis on the responsibility of individuals to manage their own affairs, to secure their own security with a prudential eye on the future. Nowhere have these been more telling than in the field of health, where patients are increasingly urged to become active and responsible consumers of medical services and products ranging from pharmaceuticals to reproductive technologies and genetic tests. This complex of marketization, autonomization, and responsibilization gives a particular character to the contemporary politics of life in advanced liberal democracies.
It also helps shape our sense of a life well-lived. Whereas once the graspingly vain might be deemed ill-adapted to a fate they cannot control, they now are best-suited to taking advantage of the new technology.
Is there any way to fight this transvaluation of values? Given the cultural roots of the original proscriptions against vanity, it may be hard to do so in a secular age. But a post like Elizabeth Schiltz’s on “Special Olympics vs. Cosmetic Surgery” is a great start.
By the way, for excellent reflections on the politics of appearance, see this post by Paul Horwitz. My own sense is that a concern with the looks of candidates is a way for voters to “feel like they’re thinking“…but that’s another post.
Photo Credit: Bosch, Superbia, detail from The Seven Deadly Sins.
July 31, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Posted in: Culture
Print This Post
Responses (4)
Patrick S. O'Donnell - July 31, 2007 at 5:27 pm
Although a secular age, we have unprecedented access to spiritual classics from the world’s major religious traditions (without implying a penchant for New Age narcissism nor the desire to be ‘comparatively religious’), with folks like Huston Smith, Karl Potter, Ninian Smart, Roger Ames, Henry Rosemont, Jr., Oliver Leaman, and Annemarie Schimmel (among others), to guide us.
And, fortunately, we have recourse to ethically and/or spiritually oriented works with philosophical integrity by the likes of Martha Nussbaum, Peter Goldie, Joel Kupperman, John Cottingham, Michael McGhee, Richard Sorabji, Pierre Hadot, Herbert Fingarette, Iris Murdoch, David Velleman, Jonathan Lear, Rosalind Hursthouse, Julia Annas, John Haldane, and Onora O’Neill (again, among others).
Or we could read some poetry by Kenneth Rexroth, or Gary Snyder, or translations by Red Pine, or….
Mike O'Shea - July 31, 2007 at 6:34 pm
Dropping long lists of names is also a potential source of spiritual fulfillment!
As for vanity and young girls: there are two issues, right? (1) the sexualization of girls’ appearance at younger and younger ages. (2) the role that fashionable cosmetics and clothes play in in-group exclusiveness among girls (and sometimes boys).
While the refrains about how strikingly secular and morally pluralistic “we’ve” all become tend to be overplayed (roll through a red state suburb on Sunday sometime), it is true that contemporary Americans might see (1) as a problem but not (2), or vice versa, or neither.
Though a non-parent myself, my sense from peers with kids is that most of them worry about both (1) and (2).
Mike O'Shea - July 31, 2007 at 7:42 pm
As I think about it, using the traditional seven, problem (1) would go more to the sin of lust (occasioning of lust?), while (2) is more centrally to do with pride (with accompanying risks of envy and wrath).
Frank - July 31, 2007 at 10:06 pm
Thanks for the list, Patrick, and to Mike for isolating some of the issues here. I think 1 and 2 are big problems–though libertarians would likely say (re 2) that if exclusion isn’t done on the basis of appearance, it might just be done on some other grounds.
The main worry I have is over a “ratchet” effect of new technologies of appearance-enhancement, which essentially dictate their use. Even something as seemingly harmless as high-heels can have many unintended health consequences:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
wp-dyn/content/graphic/2007/05/07/GR2007050700484.html
Leave a Reply