Don DeLillo, Jean Baudrillard, and the Consumer Conundrum By Mar ...

(that of academia and, more specifically, the field of Hitler studies), and that by investing these signs with such value, Jack and his associates neither strengthen nor weaken consumer ideology but simply confirm its authority.

Because the exhortation to accumulate and arrange signs of social status is at the root of consumer ideology, no combination of purchases or arrangement of goods can alter its basic dictum, which demands that we define ourselves in relation to the objects we possess. Hence Baudrillard's insistence upon the totalitarian nature of consumer ideology: the so-called “subject” has no power to alter consumer ideology and can only fall into line as an object within the system. Surrounded by objects, Baudrillard argues, we have come to behave as objects ourselves. That is, we no longer interact in a meaningful way with the world at large or the people who occupy that world. Instead, we situate ourselves within self-contained constellations of objects that insulate us from meaningful interaction of any kind. In short, we are too busy accumulating and arranging commodities in an effort to demonstrate that we live “the good life” (however it may be defined) to connect with each other or the world at large. Baudrillard illustrates the mechanics of this alienation by distinguishing between what he calls the utensil and the object:

As opposed to the utensil, then, the object takes on significance beyond its usefulness and becomes part of a complex system of objects that refer to each other and structure the subject's existence in a way that diminishes contact with the “real” world.